“Judge Cannon is Allocating Her Time in Baffling Ways” MSNBC’s Lisa Rubin Criticizes Handling of Trump Case
(SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA)
MSNBC legal correspondent Lisa Rubin tore into US District Court Judge Aileen Cannon, who is presiding over Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago classified documents case, criticizing the Trump-appointed judge’s tendency to drag her feet in moving the case forward. On Sunday, The Weekend co-host Michael Steele, filling in for Inside with Jen Psaki host Jen Psaki, spoke with Rubin about Cannon’s evident incompetence.
“It is absolutely amazing to me, Lisa, in the sense that you’ve got Judge Cannon, who seemingly is spending a lot of time scrutinizing everyone else in every other aspect of this trial, except the defendant himself, who is accused of retaining illegally classified documents,” Steele said. “What are we missing here?”
Rubin replied, “I don’t think you’re missing very much, Michael, at all. In fact, one of the things that has folks like me scratching our heads is that in terms of how she is allocating her time to that backlog of motions [she has pending], for example, she gave almost two full days to the question of whether or not [Department of Justice special counsel] Jack Smith was lawfully appointed”, told The New York Times.
The legal analyst continued, “But when Jack Smith went to her and said, ‘We need to modify Trump’s bail conditions because his speech is threatening the safety of people involved in the investigation.’ Judge Cannon said, literally, ‘You can have two hours this coming Tuesday.’ So, the fact that she is allocating her time in the way that she is, given the gravity of the situation — Jack Smith’s office just told her, for example, the other day, ‘Hey, we need you to modify these conditions, because there was a real threat aimed at an FBI official on June 11.'”
“This is not speculative or conjectural. This is imminent and real. And yet, how is Judge Cannon spending her time? Thinking about whether Jack Smith was lawfully appointed in ways that the Supreme Court and two circuit courts in recent years have already considered and rejected. It’s just baffling, Michael.”
Rubin’s critique highlights concerns over Judge Cannon’s priorities and the potential implications for the case’s progress. As the trial continues, the allocation of judicial time and attention remains a critical issue, especially given the high stakes involved. Rubin’s comments reflect a growing frustration among legal experts and observers who see the judge’s actions as undermining the urgency and seriousness of the charges against Trump.
Steele’s interview with Rubin underscores the broader debate over judicial conduct and the administration of justice in high-profile cases, drawing attention to the need for a balanced and timely approach in legal proceedings.
