Loose Cannon just ordered Smith turn over death threats info to tsf

[scipan]

Link to tweet

?t=h16hCy22TsG3l6jrWiTMSA&s=19

Moments ago, Judge Cannon just made a very dangerous ruling and we cannot let it slip under the radar.

I am sure Jack Smith’s team is working feverishly on a response right now.

Judge Cannon just ordered that by tomorrow February 10, Jack Smith provide Trump with information about the death threats against a confidential witness in the Mar-A-Lago document case which Cannon previously allowed Jack Smith to file ex parte (meaning Trump can’t see it) and under seal (meaning the public can’t see it) as part of his motion for reconsideration where Cannon applied a wrong legal standard and where she ordered dozens of confidential witnesses and their statements in the case be made public.

Here is the sequence of events:

February 6 - Cannon makes a ruling to make the names of confidential witnesses and confidential info public (doc 283)

-February 7 Wednesday Jack Smith makes a filing (doc 289) saying we are going to file a motion for reconsideration of your ruling about making confidential witnesses public and to file that motion for reconsideration we want to show you an exhibit that shows the types of death threats against witnesses but since there is an ON GOING CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION in the threats we CAN ONLY show it you as the judge and not Defendant (they may be the culprit) so we need to file it EX PARTE (only to the you the judge and not Trump) and under seal (NOT PUBLIC)

-Feb 8 Thursday (doc 293) Cannon says Jack Smith can file the document ex parte and under seal as part of your motion for reconsideration of my prior order (doc 283).

-Feb 8 Thursday (doc 294) Jack Smith files his motion for reconsideration as he said he would and filed that exhibit that shows the threats to witnesses as doc 296.

-Feb 9, moments ago, Cannon orders Jack Smith to turn over that ex parte and under seal document to Trump by February 10, effectively imperiling the safety of witness and intentionally compromising the DOJ investigation!

***
Get her outta there.

[brush]

1. Such a poor judge...law license from a Cracker Jacks box?

Last edited Fri Feb 9, 2024, 09:03 PM - Edit history (1)

[lastlib]

15. EmptyArms Motel matchbook diploma.

She MUST. BE. REMOVED! Absolutely incomptent and highly biased.

[jmowreader]

20. No, good judge...for Trump

This is an attempt to silence witnesses. Who would testify against the bastard if it’ll get you killed?

[Bev54]

56. Did Trump University teach law as well? She could well be a graduate.

[JoseBalow]

105. She should return to private practice

[ShazzieB]

62. U of Michigan, believe it or not.

Per Wikipedia: Duke University (BA), University of Michigan (JD)

I don't get it. I thought law school was supposed to be intellectually challenging. How so many stupid people manage to get law degrees, never mind pass the bar exam, is a mystery to me!

[brush]

65. That's surprising. She somehow got plugged into the Federalist Society loop...

where most repug judges arise from, thus that south Florida judgeship.

[rubbersole]

92. Hey, Ben Carson is a brain surgeon.

Probably couldn't open a pizza box.

[Seinan Sensei]

99. Brain surgeon specializing in MAGAts, appears to me

[ariadne0614]

2. Things are getting serious, no? n/t

[ShazzieB]

63. Sounds like it.

At least I hope so.

[limbicnuminousity]

3. What realistic options are there for holding Cannon accountable?

Judicial review panel? And, if so, who initiates that process and under what conditions are they allowed or required to do so? And why hasn't it happened?

[scipan]

29. Appeal to 11th Circuit

Hope they take her off the case.

[BumRushDaShow]

32. She's under the 11th Circuit

(not as bad as the 5th but still "conservative-leaning" (with Clarence Thomas assigned for emergency filings)).

[scipan]

35. Thanks, corrected.

Yeah that's why I was thinking the 5th.

[Evolve Dammit]

37. Omg. Clarence is emergency backup? What could go wrong??

[BumRushDaShow]

42. Well he hears any emergency requests to the SCOTUS from the 11th circuit Districts

But the last time there was something associated with this case and the appellate court was the "Special Master" mess that she insisted be implemented and she was (eventually) smacked down in EPIC fashion by the 11th Circuit.

[ancianita]

121. Clarence does, but the 11th Dist Appeals Court has avoided having "emergencies" he'd be happy to

deal with. Chief Judge Pryor is conservative, but he's too honest to leave anything to Clarence Thomas. Doesn't mean Thomas wouldn't try to influence decisions, though.

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, 11TH CIRCUIT JUDGES (total of 21; of 13 from Repub presidents, 6 are from Trump ):

William H. Pryor, Jr. Chief Judge (G.W.Bush)
Charles R. Wilson (Clinton)
Adalberto Jordan (Clinton)

Robin S. Rosenbaum (Obama)
Jill A. Pryor (Obama)
Kevin C. Newsom (Trump)

Elizabeth L. Branch (Trump)
Britt C. Grant (Trump)
Robert J. Luck (Trump)

Barbara Lagoa (Trump)
Andrew L. Brasher (Trump)
Nancy G. Abudu (Biden)

Gerald Bard Tjoflat (Ford)
R. Lanier Anderson III (Carter)
J.L. Edmondson (Reagan)

Joel F. Dubina (Reagan)
Susan H. Black (Carter)
Ed Carnes (H.W. Bush)

Frank M. Hull (Clinton)
Stanley Marcus (Reagan)
Julie E. Carnes (H.W. Bush)

[BumRushDaShow]

123. Some of those are "senior" judges

(especially the Ford and Carter ones and possibly Raygun and even Poppy ones - am too lazy to look up their status). I think the senior ones step in if there are a lot of cases coming through sortof as a backup.

[ancianita]

124. Works for me. Thanks.

And you're far from lazy. lol

[BumRushDaShow]

125. Just got done cleaning up the kitchen

I made some home-made orange chicken (sort of a nod to the (Chinese) Lunar New Year that starts today). Came out really tasty!

[ancianita]

126. Time much better spent!

Enjoy!

[Demsrule86]

66. I think this will be appealed and Jack Smith will ask for Cannon's recusal.

[onenote]

89. I'm pretty certain he will not be seeking her recusal.

I think folks sincerely misunderstand what this dispute is about. It's not about giving Trump access to information he doesn't already have. It's not about giving Trump the public access to classified information. It's about whether non-classified information previously provided to Trump and his attorneys, including the identity of witnesses and copies of their witness statements, should be made public when they are part of a pleading filed in a criminal case. In this instance, Smith argues -- correctly I believe -- that Cannon applied the wrong standard in deciding to allow the disclosure of this information to the public. She based her decision on the government not showing a "compelling interest" in keeping the information out of the public eye, rather than on a more easily met "good cause" standard. While Smith's reconsideration motion makes a strong case for her to change her decision, his team dug themselves a hole by filing a rather weak opposition in the first place -- it was three pages long and didn't cite any of the case law that the reconsideration motion relies on as controlling precedent. Even if she sticks to her guns and doesn't change her order and even if Smith appeals it and wins -- all "ifs" at this point -- it's not going to result in smith seeking to have her replaced.

[DemocraticPatriot]

74. I don't know what realistic 'legal' options there are, for holding her accountable,

since I am not a lawyer.....


I can think of a few "extra-legal" options for educating her about the particulars of the matter on which she has just ruled,
and her lack of sympathy for those who are targets...

That is all I can say about it.

[ancianita]

119. To file an appeal to the 11th Circuit; Smith knows Cannon can and will make a SUBSTANTIVE pre-trial ruling mistake.

Cannon knows that and is avoiding any substantive ruling on the docket. Jack Smith is waiting for Cannon to make a substantive ruling mistake before he files an appeal to the 11th Circuit.
Why has she not made a substantive ruling under CIPA yet, is because she knows what will trigger an appeal to the 11th.

Based on her being previously overruled and admonished by the 11th Circuit on previous substantive rulings,
Cannon has acted as if her job has been to not make substantive orders -- by holding a lot of 'pre-hearings' on CIPA -- so that her actions can't be appealed. She's delaying for her own benefit as much as for Trump's.

Jack Smith will move on her when she falters. If she fails to make a substantive ruling, Jack Smith could file an appeal the the 11th about how that endangers witnesses and is a major misrule by Cannon.

If he can get the 11th to admonish her again, she will have to finally act like a serious, objective judge. The problem with her sub-district is that there are only two other more experienced judges there. Hard to say, but it's possible that, given the national security importance of this case, the 11th will assign a judge from the either the central or northern FL sub-districts.

[ZonkerHarris]

4. time to go to the appellate court and dump this corrupt judge.

[SallyHemmings]

5. Time to ask for her removal

Complicit or worse incompetent.

[Liberal In Texas]

6. Holy cow. She is one of the worst judges ever, and there are a lot of others that are pretty bad.

I suppose it's too late to ask for another judge or a change in venue or something.

[dalton99a]

7. This piece of shit cultist judge wants people murdered.

[crickets]

8. She is this cavalier about death threats? (edited)

Last edited Fri Feb 9, 2024, 08:48 PM - Edit history (2)

Enough. Witnesses' lives are at stake. Whoever can pull the plug on her involvement in this case really should.

ETA
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1756092804172771458.html

Lisa Rubin @lawofruby
1h • 6 tweets • 2 min read • Read on X
NEW: In urging Judge Aileen Cannon to reconsider two orders that would, among other things, reveal the names of two dozen people who have participated in the Mar a Lago investigation, the Special Counsel's office filed a document available to Cannon and only Cannon. 1/
Specifically, the document -- in Smith's description -- "describes in some detail threats that have been made over social media to a prospective Government witness and the surrounding circumstances" & that "those threats are the subject of an ongoing federal investigation." 2/ [...more]

Link to tweet

https://post.news/@/MuellerSheWrote/2c8ji5RRUGOug0gGMgBnmel9R3y

Jack Smith writes “First, the Eleventh Circuit has held that the compelling-interest standard applied by the Court does not apply to “documents filed in connection with motions to compel discovery,” which instead may be sealed or redacted simply upon a showing of “good cause.”

He says that given the evidence of online threats currently under federal criminal investigation, combined with the standard practice of NOT releasing protected discovery to the public as it would hinder this case, is well beyond the “good cause” needed to keep them under seal. So he has asked Judge Cannon to RECONSIDER her ruling, which contains a CLEAR ERROR on the law, and to stay the release of the witness information and evidence until she rules on the motion.

What stands out to me here is his citation of the Eleventh Circuit ruling that shows Cannon is wrong on the law - that the standard for sealing this information is “good cause” and not “necessitated by a compelling governmental interest narrowly tailored to serve that interest.” That’s a pretty clear signal that if Cannon doesn’t reverse her error, that Jack Smith will APPEAL this to the Eleventh Circuit - which has vacated her ruling on the special master in the past.

All of this protected discovery was going to be unsealed today, but early this morning, Judge Cannon issued a paperless order on the docket that she is extending this decision and giving Trump/Nauta/DeOliveira until 2/23 to respond. Keep in mind, this is wholly separate from the CIPA battle that’s happening behind closed doors at the moment, which is causing more delays.

Much more at the above link, but these were the most pertinent 4 paragraphs. Sounds like this will end up going back to the Eleventh Circuit, but in the meantime: delay achievement unlocked.

[scipan]

31. And she changed it from ex parte sealed to just plain sealed.

So now Trump can see it.

[onenote]

117. She originally allowed to be filed ex parte on a "temporary basis" while she reviewed the exhibit

It was after reviewing it that she concluded that Trump and his lawyers should have access to it so they could respond to it in connection with opposing the motion for reconsideration.

Smith filed the exhibit to back up his assertion that making witnesses names and statements available to the public would pose a risk of witness harassment, intimidation, and coordination. He didn't provide any specific evidence with his original opposition to making the witness names and statements public so he submitted the exhibit to bolster his position. I would be surprised if there was only one example that he could give and that he chose one that involved Trump directly.

[scipan]

118. That was in her order?

[onenote]

122. Here are the two relevant orders

First, the order allowing the Exhibit to be filed ex parte and sealed: PAPERLESS ORDER granting the Special Counsel's Motion for Leave to File Exhibit Ex Parte and Under Seal 289 . The Motion is granted insofar as it seeks leave to file the subject exhibit under seal, for the reasons stated in the Motion. The Motion is also temporarily granted as to the ex parte nature of the request, pending the Court's in camera review of the exhibit. On or before February 9, 2024, the Special Counsel shall submit the subject document to the Court under seal and ex parte. Signed by Judge Aileen M. Cannon on 2/8/2024. (jf01) (Entered: 02/08/2024)

Second, the follow up order keeping the Exhibit sealed, but requiring it to be provided to the defendants: PAPERLESS ORDER redesignating ex parte sealed filing 296 as sealed filing only. Upon in camera review of the subject attachment, and mindful of the disfavored nature of ex parte proceedings, the Court reaffirms the Special Counsel's request to seal the attachment referenced in the Special Counsel's Motion for Leave 289 but finds an insufficient basis provided to deviate from the adversarial process in this instance. The Special Counsel is directed to transmit the exhibit to Defendants on or before February 10, 2024. The exhibit shall remain sealed pending further Court order.

[scipan]

137. Okay. You're right. She left herself an out. Nt

[sinkingfeeling]

9. Unbelievable.

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. Can the people running the criminal investigation intervene by getting someone senior to Cannon

to tell her "no"?

[WVreaper]

11. Me thinks that she wants the 11th Circuit to remove her!

It is her only way out!

[bluestarone]

14. Well, i don't think Smith

Would argue this.

[Picaro]

24. Would argue what?

[ShazzieB]

68. Argue against removing her.

Something tells me he'd be more than happy to see her go!

[MadameButterfly]

44. i hadn't thought of that

Is it possible that instead of an opportunity to bend over backward for Trump she'd rather preserve what's left of her reputation and not risk threats from Trump if she doesn't?

Probably she doesn't have that much sense, she's really just a bad and compromised judge.
Remove her either way.

[C_U_L8R]

54. Agree. She's done.

Zero fucks to give. She's forcing removal.

[UTUSN]

12. Derelict sicko.

[yardwork]

21. Your post wins the thread. You conveyed it all in two words.

Bravo.

[UTUSN]

76. Wow, way thanks

[AverageOldGuy]

13. Why I am an old infantry soldier and not a lawyer

After serving two terms in Vietnam with a 60-lb rucksack on my back and an M-16 in my hand, even at age 80 I generally take no shit from anyone -- I would respond to Judge Loose Cannon with a middle finger salute and a big FUCK YOU.

Which probably is not the way things are done in the judicial system. But I really would like to see Jack Smith do exactly that.

[BidenRocks]

58. You had a 16?

I am so sorry.
I had split time with my beloved, never failed M - 14.
I am glad you survived that Mattel pos!
Hand salute!

[AverageOldGuy]

75. Actually . . .

. . . when I arrived in country, the battalion had recently transitioned from M-14's to M-16s. Most of us newbies had trained on the M-16 in CONUS, some of us had trained on both.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

16. Plug the Cannon or toss it overboard. . . . . nt

[jls4561]

17. The flat faced Federalist Society flunkie will be reversed or removed before much damage can be done.

At least, this is the hoped for outcome. But maybe someone should put a post on the inaptly named Truth Social- “Judge Cannon betrays President Trump!” That, followed by her home address, license plate number, cell phone number and link to any social media pages, would surely cause Trump’s goon squad to start attacking her. A photo of the judge at a Taylor Swift concert might also appear.

[senseandsensibility]

18. Adding my voice to those

asking for recusal. This has gone on long enough.

[Picaro]

19. What about going back to the 11th circuit

I don’t remember whether I read it here or elsewhere. But when this whole thing started there were a number of people that were very sanguine about Judge Cannon. Contending that if she got completely out of line Smith could just go to the 11th circuit and get her removed from the case. Not hearing that anymore.

What, if anything, can be done about this judge who is clearly not impartial?

[MadameButterfly]

45. I think we've been waiting for her to do something this bad

to give SMith cause to go the the 11th circuit. If putting people's lives at risk (and intimidating witnesses) doesn't do that, I don't know what will.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

22. I suspect that the Special Counsel office is seeking an emergency stay from the 11th Circuit

Link to tweet

[MagickMuffin]

23. Me thinks she's getting her rulings from the federalist society

Because she is too inexperienced to make these kinds of decisions. Leo Leonard probably has a direct line to judge cannon!

[AllaN01Bear]

25. ah , no. t,, already knows who. so fluff off. snork

[MOMFUDSKI]

26. It is escalating. Jack says

Hold My Beer. 🍺

[Initech]

27. Get all of these MAGA shitheads out of every office.

They don't want to do their jobs and they obstruct in the name of Orange Turdblossom.

[MerryBlooms]

28. Reckless and disregard for the protection of witness and family relationship.

We went through a couple years of having to be protected from retaliatory threats. No where near this high profile, just local. The stress of having your vehicle checked for explosives, denying you're related to for years because of your last name. Your kids not being able to visit their grandparents because of credible death threats, and trying to explain why to your kids. It's horrible. As long as Trump and maga is around, many folks will be subjected to this terror. All in the name of their preferred elected official? It goes Way Deeper once you talk to these folks. Scary deep and violent.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

30. It's a cult

[scipan]

34. You get it. Nt

[area51]

80. I'm sorry this happened to you.

[MerryBlooms]

83. It was awful. It was because my father-in-law was a district judge.

Horrible untrue stories about our family. Hanging judge, etc... my husband had scars on his face from physical assaults, just because his dad was a judge. That was from many years ago, when maga wasn't even a thing. It's 100xs worse now. I still never admit being related, unless it's a trusted friend. The threat now is beyond the protection we required, Way beyond. Man hours, city, county, state dollars. I drove my little VW, but, now days, I don't know if I would be allowed to drive? I don't know how they handle that sorta threat here now.

[dchill]

33. My suspicion is that she's actually trying...

...to get herself thrown off the case.

[IcyPeas]

36. What confidential info has she already slipped to trump, I wonder?

His goons are everywhere.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

55. I thought the same thing

This is really pissing me off.

[republianmushroom]

38. She sure seems to suck up to trump.

[Freethinker65]

39. Time for her removal or just don't comply.

If Abbott can defy SCOTUS, and Jim Jordan and Trump can delay/defy subpoenas, so can Smith. Perhaps give a fake name and contact info and watch what Trump does with the info. Trump has already vowed to use the power of the Presidency on day one to go after perceived enemies.

Trump wants the names to be able to threaten and manipulate the witnesses should his trial take place before the election (pretty sure Cannon will allow delays indefinitely).

[MadameButterfly]

48. doesn't SMith put his case at risk if he goes against a judge? But

how can he put witnesses at risk. Like a reporter protecting his sources, Smith just can't comply

[MorbidButterflyTat]

51. That is a great idea!

"Perhaps give a fake name and contact info and watch what Trump does with the info." I wonder if this has been done in other cases...ie. classified docs.

Cannon knows damn well Slobby's motive, besides having been TOLD, WTF is she playing at? Deliberately endangering witnesses should be her exit from judgeship.

[onenote]

88. If he doesn't comply, his reconsideration motion is denied.

And the redacted information in TRUMP's filings, which information about the names of witnesses already in Trump's possession through discovery -- will be made public.

So I think we can safely assume Smith isn't stupid and won't take your suggestion.

[Freethinker65]

95. Of course he will comply. I wasn't serious.

Pretty sure most on DU understood that. Just pointing out the hypocrisy.

Some GOP members are now actively recommending not following court orders and are getting away with it.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

100. He might NOT comply. He might directly petition 11th Circuit instead. . . . .nt

[Evolve Dammit]

40. Is there another photo of this judge ? I think she may be AI🤔

[PlutosHeart]

47. She reminds me of a cheap childhood doll

that was knocked over and when set back up her eyes were askew.

I agree. Her pic is really off.

[Evolve Dammit]

108. Ha! yes and it is seemingly the only photo that exists of her which is just bizarre??

[PlutosHeart]

138. Vampires do not

photograph well.

[Evolve Dammit]

139. entirely possible. Had not thought of that!

[Takket]

41. since when is it this complicated to protect witness?

protecting witness is a pretty vital function of our criminal justice system. we cannot have trials without that ability for people to speak up with the knowledge they will be protected from retribution. on what grounds if she ruling that death threats are not worthy of protecting witnesses?

[Jarqui]

43. What good purpose would there be to do that?

Why risk the safety and well being of a witness.
They could take off

[EndlessWire]

46. What a dirty trick!

Jack isn't going to throw his witnesses under the bus. He relied on her order of confidentiality. This is blatantly unfair. If she granted his request, and he filed his evidence under seal, and then she orders him to reveal names after the fact--that's crazy!

I can't see how he can do that, because she'll get someone killed. He has to appeal to the 11th Circuit. He relied on her ruling. There is no good faith and fair dealing here. What else can he do?? This is awful.

This seems to be more than incompetence. Plus, she gave him one damned day? One day? She is trying to get him in jeopardy for noncompliance by not meeting a deadline. I think Jack will file something--not everyone is as dumb as Cannon.

What in the world happened that she suddenly did this? Time for her to go.

[MadameButterfly]

49. probably taking her orders from Trump

[Martin Eden]

50. Seems to me "Judge" Cannon is complicit in a strategy of witness intimidation

Though I could be mistaken, of course.

[Think. Again.]

52. Does Mr. Smith even have the authority...

...to reveal sensitive DOJ information to civilian trump, even under a judge's order?

That cannon person has been entrusted with the sensitive information due to her standing as a judge, but can a prosecutor legally give priviledged information to a civilian? Or would that have to be done by whomever has authority in the investigation of the threats (which I am presuming is not Mr. Smith)?

[Irish_Dem]

53. She is determined to get someone killed.

And some of the classified document secrets being spilled may also get people killed.

This woman is either crazy or evil.

[area51]

79. Either crazy or evil?

Why not both?

[Irish_Dem]

90. Yes could be both.

Or perhaps stupid.

[Pas-de-Calais]

57. Pull her clown car law credentials!!

[niyad]

59. May she and her enablers receive everything they deserve. Three times three.

[SCantiGOP]

60. tsf?

I assume this refers to Trump, but can we please use normal language in post titles? Some people don’t hang out here much and won’t be able to understand what is being discussed.

[MustLoveBeagles]

78. It stands for That Sick Fuck

The text speak confuses me to.

[progressoid]

96. +1

[Cha]

61. What can Jack Smith do

About that fucking order?

[Demsrule86]

64. Appeal it...time to recuse this crazy Trumper judge.

[flashman13]

71. I've always thought Smith was taking his time waiting for Cannon to make an escpeially egregious ruling

before he went to the 11th circuit and asked to have her removed. Her order directly endangers lives if the names are made public. I would say this is sufficiently egregious.

[DemocraticPatriot]

67. Perhaps the judge is too ignorant and uneducated in what it feels like

to receive numerous death threats....

[MustLoveBeagles]

69. This is crazy

What can be done to protect those witnesses?

[Poiuyt]

70. I'm sorry -- What does TSF mean?

[MustLoveBeagles]

72. That sick fuck

That's what Biden called Stinky

[Poiuyt]

81. Thanks!

I remember now

[flashman13]

73. It means Trump is totally FUBAR.

[Kablooie]

77. Here we go.

There will be assassinations of critical witnesses.
The press will moan about how terrible it is and blame the assassins when Trump and his pocket judge are totally responsible.

How can our legal system be so unbelievably poor at administering justice?
There are so many, many ways Trump can use to screw up the prosecution and nothing can be done to stop him.

Will he ever suffer consequences? I’m not at all confident he will.

[redqueen]

82. She may end up being removed from the case

I certainly hope so

But Tuesday’s ruling could backfire on her. Before she issued her decision, Roger Parloff, the senior editor of Lawfare, warned that granting Trump’s request would be “highly controversial” and could spur more intense scrutiny of Cannon.

After Cannon ruled, Parloff noted that Smith’s team could file an interlocutory appeal based on the impression that Cannon has been too favorable to Trump. Cannon could potentially be removed from the case altogether.

https://newrepublic.com/post/178864/judge-aileen-cannon-trump-massive-favor-classified-documents

[onenote]

84. There seems to be a lot of confusion about the recent orders.

I've seen several posts that assume the orders are giving Trump access to the names of witnesses. Sorry, but he already has access to those names under the court's prior protective order. The issue is whether the public at large should be given access to that information (which otherwise is subject to a protective order preventing Trump or his lawyers from disclosing it to the public). In seeking reconsideration of Cannon's order which would allow that public access, Smith argues that such disclosure would create the risk of witness intimidation, harassment and coordination. And to back this up, he made a separate filing that details examples of one or more witnesses being threatened or harassed. Smith has the stronger argument about keeping this information out of the hands of the public, but to be clear, it is not about keeping the name of the witness out of Trump's hands. Trump's lawyers are allowed to know the names of the witnesses and to share that information with Trump consistent with the protective order, which prevents Trump or his lawyers from disclosing that information to the public.

[Sugarcoated]

85. Why does the judge want to reveal the names to the public?

What is her legal reasoning?

[onenote]

86. She claims that it is consistent with the constitution and precedent. She is mistaken

Well, she isn't mistaken that as a broad, general proposition, the public is entitled to see non-classified material filed in criminal proceedings. However, there are exceptions and she relied on the wrong standard -- requiring the government to show a compelling interest rather than "good cause". The latter standard is met by simply showing that there is evidence of, or a reason to fear, that making the names of the witnesses public will lead to attempts to harass and intimidate the witnesses. To be honest, Smith's team didn't do a very good job in their initial opposition to disclosure -- they filed a three page opposition that didn't cite the burden of proof or the relevant cases relating to the burden of proof and they didn't provide any specific evidence regarding threats to witnesses. In the reconsideration request, they are trying to fill in the information they didn't include in the initial opposition in order to get the judge to reverse her decision.

[Sugarcoated]

87. Thank you so much for the explanation!

[tavernier]

91. Trump wouldn't threaten the witnesses himself

He would leave that up to his goon squad, which is why that information should remain sealed. Because if you instruct trump not to share it, he sure wouldn’t.

[scipan]

101. With the one exception of that examples doc

Attached to his motion for reconsideration that he didn't want defendant to see.

She agreed, then changed her mind and ordered Smith to turn it over to Trump today. Still under seal, but not ex parte anymore.

You know more than me, so am I correct?

[onenote]

102. The document he sought to file on an ex parte basis is not one of the documents involved in the original order

Smith's team filed opposed the original request by Trump to un-redact certain information that Trump already had been provided, which would allow the public to see that information. The only part of that opposition that has been made public is a four page document that offers only a generalized argument in opposition to disclosure.

In the order granting -- in large part but not completely -- Cannon held that the Special Counsel's office had "failed to set forth a sufficient factual or legal basis warranting deviation from the strong presumption in favor of public access to the records at issue." With respect to the disclosure of the identity of witnesses and the substance of witness statements, Cannon acknowledged that "substantiated" witness safety and intimidation concerns can form a valid basis for overriding the strong presumption in favor of public access, but found that the Special Counsel had failed to provide the necessary factual basis to justify sealing: "the Special Counsel’s submission offers nothing in the form of concrete factual support for those rationales or otherwise identifies any supporting evidence in the record to justify granting the Special Counsel’s broad and unspecified requests on those bases."

In its motion for reconsideration, the Special Counsel attempts to provide the factual support Cannon had found to be lacking. This included an exhibit that "describes in some detail threats that have been made over social media to a prospective Government witness and the surrounding circumstances, and the fact that those threats are the subject of an ongoing federal investigation being handled by a United States Attorney’s Office. Disclosure of the details and circumstances of the threats risks disrupting the investigation."

The Special Counsel not only asked that the exhibit be sealed so it wouldn't be available to the public, but also that it be treated as an ex parte submission which would mean Trump and his lawyers couldn't see it either. Trump's lawyers did not object to the exhibit being sealed but argued that they should be given access to it so that they could respond to the Special Counsel's motion for reconsideration that relied on the exhibit.

Cannon agreed with Trump's counsel and kept the exhibit sealed but denied it "ex parte" status, thereby allowing Trump and his lawyers to see the exhibit and thereby address it in their inevitable opposition to the motion for reconsideration. She didn't "change her mind" -- she accepted the filing the ex parte status of the filing only on a temporary basis pending her review of the exhibit. Upon reviewing it, she concluded it should remain sealed from public disclosure but granted access to Trump and his lawyers for their use in fashioning an opposition to the motion for reconsideration.

[scipan]

104. Correct but Smith claims she used the wrong standard

and said it was a "clear error", which apparently is strong legal language.

[onenote]

107. Correct -- she should grant reconsideration on that basis, but...

The danger here is that, from as far as we can tell, Smith never mentioned the applicable standard -- good cause -- in his original opposition to the disclosure of the witness names and witness statements and did not cite to the cases that he is relying on in his motion for reconsideration. I'm rather surprised that, given the circumstances and this judge's history, he wouldn't have made the strongest possible argument in his initial opposition. Courts aren't fond of litigants making legal arguments for the first time on reconsideration. Smith has done a pretty good job of explaining why the initial opposition was so sparse and, hopefully, he will be successful in digging himself out of that hole.

[scipan]

109. Oh, okay, that's bad. Maybe no appeal to the 5th circuit

Except for the "examples" doc filed separately.

[GiqueCee]

93. Maybe this grotesque...

... example of over reaching incompetence will be her undoing. She is demanding that Smith endanger the lives of witnesses. That is unforgivable.

[onenote]

106. she has suspended her earlier order pending a decision on Smith's motion for reconsideration

If she grants the motion for reconsideration -- as she should -- this will be the end of it. If she denies it, Smith may try to find a way to stop that order from being carried out, but even then I doubt he'll seek to have her replaced.

[GiqueCee]

116. I suppose...

... she meets the stringent requirements for a "Useful Idiot", but the term, "Loose Cannon" has never been more apt. In the days of warships under sail, if a cannon – and they were HEAVY – broke loose from its breech lines and careened around the gun deck, it was a deadly hazard, and nearly impossible to control; a description that suits Aileen to a "T".

[orangecrush]

94. I hope

He can get her removed.

Even so, she served Trump's purpose, which was to delay.

[moniss]

97. The ruling covered all witness

reports. So now the legal team for the Orange Ruski can maybe leave the list out on the desk while they go get coffee and leave someone like Roger Stone alone in their office.

[Emile]

98. I think the death threats Cannon has been getting

has her scared shitless and that's why she is dragging this out to appease the terrorists.

[lindysalsagal]

103. Some day we'll find out just how many people he threatened directly

After most of this congress is gone.

[bluestarone]

110. So, confused here. Is the judges order still

For Smith to turn this in by midnight TODAY?

[scipan]

111. I believe so. Haven't seen any filing by Smith

and I've been looking. He still has time though.

[onenote]

112. Smith is still subject to an order to give Trump and his attorneys the exhibit to the motion for reconsideration

before the end of the day.
My guess is that he will comply.

[asiliveandbreathe]

128. No, for now..she pumped the breaks..

Meidas touch Popok..

[onenote]

129. She did that yesterday with respect to the order to un-redact the witness names, statements.

She stayed that order and set a schedule for Trump to respond to Smith's motion for reconsideration. Her order requiring Smith to turn over the exhibit to his motion for reconsideration was issued AFTER that, the point being that she concluded that in order for Trump to effectively respond to the motion for reconsideration, his attorneys need to see the Exhibit.

We'll see in the next few hours whether or not Smith complies with the order regarding the exhibit or tries to stop it from taking effect. I continue to think he'll comply.

[bluestarone]

130. I'm not sure i can trust Cannon with these copies.

What is your thoughts on that?

[onenote]

133. Which copies? As the judge, she gets to see everything. Period.

[bluestarone]

134. Guess i didn't know this TY

Sealed i hope.

[asiliveandbreathe]

131. Popok explains why she hit the breaks..on her paper order

to turn over unredacted docs to tsf..by today..it is in the video..I am not trying to contradict, just trying to be helpful....

[onenote]

135. Wrong. There are two separate issues.

First is the order that would let Trump unredact the discovery material he references in his pleading, thereby making that pleading available to the public and press without those redactions. That is the order that Cannon "paused" pending resolution of Smith's motion for reconsideration of that order.

Second is the order requiring Smith to provide Trump a copy of the exhibit to the motion for reconsideration so Trump can respond to the arguments made by Smith that cite that exhibit. That order still stands at this point and Smith has until the end of today to comply or fight it.

[Diraven]

113. She's doing it intentionally

I think she knows she's issuing bad rulings but every time she does it causes weeks of delay while they are appealed. With enough delays she can carry Trump all the way past election day.

[sellitman]

115. Exactly!

Delay, delay, delay.

[3825-87867]

114. Aileen M. Cannon

or "AMC"....

Another Magat Cultist

[Chainfire]

120. I have full faith in our criminal justice system.

I also believe in the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, Big Foot and Nessie.

[asiliveandbreathe]

127. UPDATE loose Cannon pumped the breaks...Meidastouch..Popok

Pumped the breaks on her own 10th order..to be continued..but for now, witnesses are protected..

[themaguffin]

132. Why the fuck would anything be turned over to trump? WTF

[onenote]

136. Because Smith has filed a motion for reconsideration that relies on an exhibit that hasn't been given to the defense

and in order for the defense to respond to that motion they need to see what is supporting it.

[onenote]

140. Meiselas was "sure" Smith was feverishly working on a response. WRONG!

Smith complied with the order. Which anyone who actually knew what was going on would have expected. Smith filed the exhibit to provide factual support for his motion for reconsideration. Trump gets an opportunity to oppose that motion. Courts generally don't deny a litigant the opportunity to review the factual evidence supporting a motion.

Meiselas should be feverishly working on a post where he admits he was 100 percent wrong. But I'm sure he isn't going to do that.