Judge Cannon Issues A Series Of Rulings To Benefit Donald Trump

Even though Judge Aileen Cannon has already given Donald Trump everything he's wanted, it doesn't mean that she's done doing favors for him. In a series of rulings over the weekend, Cannon once again sided with Trump by allowing the unredacted statements of witnesses to be released, making it easy for Trump and his friends to find out who has said what to the prosecutors. She also issued a ruling giving Trump the benefit of the doubt on anything he claims is privileged, setting up more challenges and delays for the future. Ring of Fire's Farron Cousins explains what happened.

Check out our merch by visiting our store

Subscribe to our podcast

Become a member today!

Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!

Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!

Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel

Be sociable! Follow us on:

*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.

This past weekend, judge Eileen Cannon finally got around to, you know, ruling on some of the motions that she's been sitting on for months and months and months. Some of them still from last year, by the way. And of course it's because she's done nothing about most of these motions over the last nine months that she decided recently to, uh, basically delay trump's, uh, trial indefinitely. There is no trial date anywhere in the near future. Certainly not gonna be this year because she says, I'm just too backed up with all these motions. But as I said, she did get around to, you know, dealing with a couple of them this past weekend. And by golly, wouldn't you know it, she consistently ruled in Donald Trump's favor. One of the rulings she issued was technically against a motion filed by Donald Trump, but even by ruling against it, she's actually still doing him a massive favor.

And that particular ruling was Donald Trump's legal team had asked, Hey, could you redact some of these witness statements so that they don't get released to the public? And she said, no, no, I'm not gonna do that, even though I've had to go back and redact the names of the witnesses because I got in trouble for that. Uh, I'm not gonna redact their statements. And as former federal prosecutor, Joyce Vance pointed out, it's actually pretty easy from the statements of the witnesses to figure out who they are. Maybe not for us in the public, but Donald Trump and his legal team can absolutely figure out who these people are, which could then lead to intimidation, bribery, and all sorts of things because there's no gag order on, in place on, uh, Trump and Judge Eileen Cannon's trial. So Donald Trump could know who these people are from these statements that he sees.

He could go out and start blasting them on social media. We wouldn't know why, because we wouldn't have access to it, right? But it is what it is. So even though Trump's people filed the motion, her ruling against it actually benefits him, which by the way might be why they filed it. Filing a motion with the intent of getting the motion struck down is actually a pretty smart legal strategy and is not something that has not happened in the past. But there was another ruling that's even worse. Let me read you this. Canon also ruled that where parties disagreed about whether to redact the material because of Trump's claims of attorney-client privilege, she would accept it as privileged pending reviews fuse. Let me explain to you why that is such a big deal. So basically, if you have Jack Smith go up to her and say, Hey, this

Is not protected, uh, by attorney-client privilege, and Trump goes in and says, oh, yes it is. She's already said her. Now default position is to go with Trump. First of all, that's insane. You can't just issue a blanket ruling and say, you know what? If you guys disagree, I'm automatically gonna go with Donald Trump. That alone should be grounds for dismissal. Like right off the bat, she should be kicked off the trial for that alone. She's literally telling Jack Smith, if you disagree with him, I'm gonna side with him.