Trump's Lawyer Says It'd Be 'Unfair' to Make Him Face Consequences Before Election
Trump's Lawyer Says It'd Be 'Unfair' to Make Him Face Consequences Before Election
A lawyer for Donald Trump argued on Friday that it would be "unfair" to make the former president stand trial before the presidential election.
The former president was in Florida on Friday, where a federal judge he appointed signaled she could push back the trial in his classified documents case
The start date for the Florida trial on Donald Trump‘s mishandling of classified documents is in the hands of a judge the former president appointed to the federal circuit.
The trial, currently scheduled to begin May 20, is likely to be delayed after prosecutors and defense attorneys met at a federal courthouse in Fort Pierce, Florida, on Friday.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, appointed by Trump to the Southern District of Florida in 2020, said the timeline proposed by prosecutors for a trial this summer was “unrealistic.”
The hearing ended Friday without a new start date, though Cannon said the proposed schedule needs “some space” and “flexibility,” according to CNN.
You're viewing a single thread.
This is the difference between the two sides.
The right thinks that the rules don't apply to them.
The left takes even the smallest infractions way more seriously than they need to. I'm still pissed off about Franken. Pretty sure Biden didn't do a damn thing to protect his son aside from just being his father as most good parents would do regardless of their innocence or guilt.
Also take a look at the recent Special Counsel investigations. Democratic AGs gave wide berths to the investigations into Clinton and Biden, and those reports exonerated the people involved, but had nasty editorial asides that did permanent damage to both campaigns.
Meanwhile, the investigation into Trump found serious issues, but Barr massaged the thing so that Trump could say it "totally exonerated" him.
If playing by the rules gives you a stark disadvantage, but breaking the rules brings no punishment, then the only reason to follow rules is your internal moral code. Republicans seem to conveniently ignore their self-professed morals whenever they need to gain an advantage.
Oh yeah, I remember the Clinton investigation. Literally the only thing they could get him on was perjury over something that should never been a public issue. They kept looking and looking until they found something to "get him" on and wasted fuck knows how much money and resources doing it.
I'm really hoping (but not expecting) the dems to grow some metaphorical balls and after this election (assuming Biden wins) they go even deeper into the shit the right has been doing for decades and lock as many as them up or at least get them barred from politics, law, whatever for eternity.
I was thinking of the other Clinton, though, and her buttery males. That investigation ended in a finger wag, yet it was instrumental in her defeat. (Well, that, and the fact she has the charisma of plain cheerios which have sat in the milk for too long.)
Oh yeah, I guess that one was so inconsequential that I forgot about it for a minute. It really was stupid, yes, she was wrong and security is important but she wasn't and isn't the only one not focused on security.