jerrymahoney

From the linked NY Times article: Still, “out-of-left-field rulings could be coming here,” he said, adding, “When you have classified documents, there is abundant opportunities to slow this down, and if they’ve got a judge who is willing to go along with slowing this down, it becomes very hard to predict when this will go to trial.” To be sure, there is no guarantee that Judge Cannon will resume the pattern she exhibited last fall. It remains to be seen whether she will respond to the reputational harm it brought her by using a second turn in the spotlight to rule in a more straightforward fashion.

From the linked NY Times story: Still, the odds of an indictment being randomly assigned to Judge Cannon were low. There are 15 active Federal District Court judges in South Florida, along with 11 on senior status who are still assigned to hear cases but at a reduced workload‌. (Clerk) Ms. Noble did not immediately respond to an email seeking clarification of what happened.

Just to expound on the NY Times article I posted above, the Clerk of the Southern District Court said that there are 15 active judges and each case is assigned randomly regardless if a judge was involved in a prior related case. So the chance that Judge Cannon would get the Trump case twice would be 1 in 15 x 1 in 15 or 1 in 225.

A Trump-Appointed Judge Who Showed Him Favor Gets the Documents Case The surprise assignment of Judge Aileen Cannon could be a setback for prosecutors as they unveiled a sweeping classified files indictment. Criminal defendants routinely claim that prosecutors threatened witnesses and committed other misconduct, and they rarely succeed. But if Judge Cannon entertains those claims more deferentially than trial judges normally do, Mr. Smith and his team could effectively go on trial before Mr. Trump. “Pretrial litigation over the conduct of prosecutors is a good one for gumming things up and fits with Trump’s message, which is going to be out of control, politically motivated prosecutors,’” Mr. Buell said. “So we will see plenty of that. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/09/us/politics/trump-documents-judge-aileen-cannon.html No paywall: https://archive.is/WGngA

So let's just say Judge Cannon would likely not be SC Jack Smith's first choice to hear the (at least preliminary) case.

Trump-appointed judge in documents case had key decision reversed June 9 (Reuters) - Aileen Cannon, the Florida judge initially assigned to oversee Donald Trump's classified documents case, made headlines last year when she decided in favor of the former U.S. president at a pivotal stage of the case and was later reversed on appeal. After federal agents searched Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence last year in Palm Beach, Florida as part of their probe, Cannon was thrust into the spotlight when Trump's lawyers asked her to halt the FBI's review of records. Cannon agreed with Trump's lawyers that the FBI should not review the records until an independent third party scrutinized them for materials that could be covered by attorney-client privilege or executive privilege, legal doctrines that might shield some documents from disclosure. https://www.reuters.com/legal/summons-indicates-trump-appointed-judge-will-initially-oversee-documents-case-2023-06-09

Audio only. DOJ has audio recording of Trump discussing classified document he took: CNN https://news.yahoo.com/doj-audio-recording-trump-discussing-214445369.html Maybe like Alexander Butterfield and the Nixon Tapes? And maybe not.

Yes. You are right Chapter 37 codifies the Espionage Act. I was just noting, as there is a reference to the Act on most pages this topic, it is not specifically referenced in the indictment.

From a link above: For example, the Espionage Act of 1917 — one of the three laws cited in the search warrant of Mar-a-Lago in Florida ... As there has been much talk about the Espionage Act on here and elsewhere and it was even noted in a federal search warrant, all I was saying is that it was not specifically referenced in the indictment. I know what the US Code is.

OK but the Espionage Act is not specifically referenced in the indictment.

from NY Times -- secure haung nam:

Just to note that of the 32 counts involving Trump, the 5 counts involving Trump and Nauta, and the one count solely involving Nauta, none involve the Espionage Act (1917)

The Roy Cohn playbook. Deny everything. It's worked for 50 years, why change now?

... or, I should have said, Washington DC.

Well even though Miami-Dade County went for Biden in 2020, jury pool there would certainly be less hostile to Trump than New York City and environs.

Opinion What to look for if Trump is indicted by the DOJ We believe that the rule of law requires that Trump be charged, based on the wealth of publicly available facts and the history of the Justice Department charging people who did far less. Just last week, a former Army lieutenant colonel was sentenced to three years in prison for illegal retention of classified documents. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/06/07/justice-department-trump-indictment-possible-details/ no paywall https://archive.is/xQbxS

Trump seeks to stop second E. Jean Carroll lawsuit Lawyers for Donald Trump are attempting to block a long-stalled defamation suit by writer E. Jean Carroll by using her successful $5 million verdict in a different case she won against the former president. The “operative question in this case is, and has always been, whether a rape occurred in the Bergdorf Goodman dressing room," the filing said, and the jury "found that one did not.” "Faced with the Carroll II jury's rejection of her rape accusation, Ms. Carroll now sees to remove nearly every reference * of the word 'rape' in her complaint and abandon the narrative she has conveyed to the public for years," Habba said. (* approximately 71 changes 'rape' to 'sexual abuse') https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-seeks-stop-second-e-jean-carroll-lawsuit-rcna87921 ******************* NB The following is verbatim from the actual MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO AMEND (their caps) https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.543790/gov.uscourts.nysd.543790.164.0.pdf I. PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED ALLEGATIONS UNDULY PREJUDICE DEFENDANT It is well established that “prejudice to the opposing party resulting from a proposed amendment [is] among the most important reasons to deny leave to amend.” With respect to the instant application, Plaintiff’s proposed amendment is unduly prejudicial because it seeks to fundamentally alter the nature of this action, at the eleventh hour, in response to a jury verdict that directly undercuts the viability of her claim. As such, the proposed amendment is inherently prejudicial to Defendant. II. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION SHOULD BE DENIED BECAUSE OF PLAINTIFF’S UNDUE DELAY Courts in the Second Circuit have consistently held that where a party seeks to amend after an inordinate delay, “[t]he burden is on the party who wishes to amend to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay.” III. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO AMEND SHOULD BE DENIED DUE TO FUTILITY. Plaintiff’s Motion should be rejected for another standalone reason: the remarks made by the Defendant during the Town Hall meeting are safeguarded by the fair reporting privilege, which consequently prevents them from being used as a foundation to enhance the punitive damages sought by Plaintiff in this case, and the amendment is therefore futile. Of the amendments proposed by Plaintiff, the most significant change to her Complaint is the sudden, ex post facto revision of what she claims occurred in the Bergdorf Goodman dressing 7 room. Indeed, in her Amended Complaint, Plaintiff seeks to abandon her accusation that Defendant raped her—which she has claimed since 2019 and continues to maintain publicly to this day—in an attempt to re-characterize the alleged incident as a “sexual assault.” Her reason for doing so is clear—she is attempting to comport her Complaint with the jury's verdict from Carroll II to capitalize on the favorable aspect of the ruling while minimizing the impact of the adverse portion. (my italics) Consequently, the Plaintiff has substituted approximately 71 mentions of the previous assault as a rape with various iterations of "sexual assault" and "sexual abuse." The Amended Complaint also sets forth a number of other substantive changes, including, but not limited to, the following: Instead of stating that it was strange for the lingerie department of Bergdorf Goodman to be empty, the Complaint now states that it was not uncommon for this to occur; Id at ¶ 34.

Actually the other 2 reasonably current topics relate to Trumps 2022 jury trial and the resulting appeal. This is the Carroll 2020 case filed when Trump was still president. But I'll be more careful next time, Mr. Interlocutor

Nothing. One guy said on this topic that all these Trump follies should be FUN and I replied that the Carroll cases will be fun long before any of the 1 criminal indictment (case scheduled in 2024) and the other 2 possible cases where no indictments have yet to be issued.

To answer the OP query: If I'm still around when my Thai wife reaches 43, I'll let you know.

As linked above. This is Judge Kaplan's 24MAY2023 Court order: ORDER: Unless otherwise ordered, any opposition to plaintiff's (Carroll's) motion to amend, and any reply in support thereof, under the Rules of this Court, is due on or before June 5, 2023 and June 12, 2023, respectively. In other words, starts TODAY US EDT time.

You said: Don’t disappear, there’s a whole lot of fun yet to be had. Sure it's not the Mar-a-lago document case but it's a civil case where the fun is going to start long before the other criminal cases including the document case where there have not yet been charges.

Well not medicine but this is the best (funniest) example I have found of what can go wrong: A lawyer used ChatGPT and now has to answer for its ‘bogus’ citations Lawyers suing the Colombian airline Avianca submitted a brief full of previous cases that were just made up by ChatGPT, The New York Times reported today. After opposing counsel pointed out the nonexistent cases, US District Judge Kevin Castel confirmed, “Six of the submitted cases appear to be bogus judicial decisions with bogus quotes and bogus internal citations,” and set up a hearing as he considers sanctions for the plaintiff’s lawyers. https://www.theverge.com/2023/5/27/23739913/chatgpt-ai-lawsuit-avianca-airlines-chatbot-research

Actually big doings start next week as motions become due in Court for Carroll to amend her 2020 Defamation complaint. * NB This is a separate trial from the recently concluded battery-$5miilion jury trial. The reason the 2020 case has moved so slowly is that Trump was sued by Carroll while he was the current US President. * Trump fights to keep the word 'rape' in E. Jean Carroll's remaining defamation case https://news.yahoo.com/trump-fights-keep-word-rape-002817597.html

Amorn has them.