Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Trump gets access to sealed documents on witness threats in Mar-a-Lago case [View all]onenote
(46,086 posts)36. Couple of responses
First there was no bait and switch. cannon only granted the request to accept the exhibit on a temporary basis until she had a chance to review it, which she did pretty quickly.
Second, if Smith did wanted to avoid disclosure of the exhibit he could have withdrawn it. Presumably he felt having it as part of the record was more important particularly if he needed to appeal an adverse decision on his motion. For cannon to strike it would have been prejudicial to Smiths motion. The appropriate thing was to order its disclosure and give smith the opportunity to fight her order, comply with it or withdraw the exhibit and let consideration of the reconsideration motion proceed
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
47 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Trump gets access to sealed documents on witness threats in Mar-a-Lago case [View all]
muriel_volestrangler
Feb 2024
OP
It is bizarre considering how Florida goes out of its way to shut down public records
Baitball Blogger
Feb 2024
#27
And why aren't multiple US media sources talking about this? Good for The Guardian.
pnwmom
Feb 2024
#4
To the extent US media sources have discussed this, they've screwed it up as did the Guardian.
onenote
Feb 2024
#22
Apparently Smith doesn't share your level of concern or he would have withdrawn the exhibit rather than disclose it.
onenote
Feb 2024
#44
Again, this story wasn't about witness lists. This story was about DOJ asking the judge to keep under seal
pnwmom
Feb 2024
#45
I was responding to your statement that you "think there is good reason to be concerned "
onenote
Feb 2024
#46
I don't see the contradiction between the Guardian's piece and what you're saying.
pnwmom
Feb 2024
#28
You can bet Trump or someone he orders to will try to intimidate the witnesses in some way and if that happens the
cstanleytech
Feb 2024
#6
I just read this article and found it confusing. Will re-read tonight when house is quiet.
riversedge
Feb 2024
#7
This contradicts other reports saying Cannon issued a stay of her order. Nt
Fiendish Thingy
Feb 2024
#8
No contradiction. There are two orders. One was stayed. The other wasn't even challenged by Smith.
onenote
Feb 2024
#15
No. The second order resulted in Trump getting access to the Exhibit to Smith's Motion for Reconsideration
onenote
Feb 2024
#20
As I expected. Smith wasn't going to prevail in keeping the exhibit from Trump.
onenote
Feb 2024
#14
Unfortunately, this is far too common. It's hard to keep evidence from defense.
Silent Type
Feb 2024
#29
Witness, poll workers, judges, DA's et al are now fair game for lethal threats. When did this happen? Ahem.
Evolve Dammit
Feb 2024
#30
I was speaking of the overall trend towards attacking the aforementioned...
Evolve Dammit
Feb 2024
#47