Cannon *appears* to be willing to do the delaying work so Team Trump doesn’t have to: render decisions that have to be appealed then likely to be reversed bringing things back to square one at which point she might act as directed by the appellate court or maybe just do the same thing all over again to create further delay.
Eh. Just gives Team Smith more time to add a claim that Trump used the retained papers to sell which, you know, is literal espionage.
Tangential: every reporter reporting stuff involving in-court litigation really should have a litigator on speed dial to get what’s happening in court translated. A lot of pre-trial stuff are formalities of sort, and not what they seem to a layperson.
That said, David’s characterization of Cannon as a wild card may be a huge understatement.
Trump remarks about Fani’s sex life is so reflective of how he operates. Like a David Pecker, old White boomer trope. Trump the rapist FFS. Great reminder on Benen’s piece 🙏
I first read your link to the op Ed in the NYT by Jack Goldsmith and was so enraged I began writing my own rebuttal, all the while wondering why this shortsighted perspective hadn’t been met with a counter:
Me: The author gives talking points as though he favors Republicans angle: Peter Stroke not only had unfavorable comments regarding the R. nominee, but disparaging comments of D. nominees.
The Steele Dossier did have some factual and credible leads, and some which were not proven or were dispelled; it was not a final document and not intended to be taken as completely well researched. Given the dangerous nature of findings, Steele felt sharing of the contents was time sensitive.
Let’s discuss Goldsmith’s equivocation of the Mueller report and the charges against Hunter Biden...
And then I realized Josh Marshall had already taken the step to address the narrow sightedness of the scholar’s take. Way to go Josh and thank you for saying it way better than I could have!!! Phew!!!!!!
David, very sharp focus today & you spotted 2 "no response" for no reasons. Any attorney, Don't mess with Tanya.
Cannon *appears* to be willing to do the delaying work so Team Trump doesn’t have to: render decisions that have to be appealed then likely to be reversed bringing things back to square one at which point she might act as directed by the appellate court or maybe just do the same thing all over again to create further delay.
Eh. Just gives Team Smith more time to add a claim that Trump used the retained papers to sell which, you know, is literal espionage.
Tangential: every reporter reporting stuff involving in-court litigation really should have a litigator on speed dial to get what’s happening in court translated. A lot of pre-trial stuff are formalities of sort, and not what they seem to a layperson.
That said, David’s characterization of Cannon as a wild card may be a huge understatement.
Trump remarks about Fani’s sex life is so reflective of how he operates. Like a David Pecker, old White boomer trope. Trump the rapist FFS. Great reminder on Benen’s piece 🙏
I first read your link to the op Ed in the NYT by Jack Goldsmith and was so enraged I began writing my own rebuttal, all the while wondering why this shortsighted perspective hadn’t been met with a counter:
Me: The author gives talking points as though he favors Republicans angle: Peter Stroke not only had unfavorable comments regarding the R. nominee, but disparaging comments of D. nominees.
The Steele Dossier did have some factual and credible leads, and some which were not proven or were dispelled; it was not a final document and not intended to be taken as completely well researched. Given the dangerous nature of findings, Steele felt sharing of the contents was time sensitive.
Let’s discuss Goldsmith’s equivocation of the Mueller report and the charges against Hunter Biden...
And then I realized Josh Marshall had already taken the step to address the narrow sightedness of the scholar’s take. Way to go Josh and thank you for saying it way better than I could have!!! Phew!!!!!!