It’s less of a rookie problem and more of a corrupt hack problem.
As a corrupt hack, I find that offensive.
Even corrupt hacks think this bitch too much
cuz she’s also incompetent.
They’re not “taking advantage of a rookie”. They’re in cahoots. I will guarantee you she sees an opportunity to angle this into a possible appointment higher up the judicial food chain if Trump gets re-elected, and wants to make sure Trump gets the hint that if she gets an appointment, she’ll continue to run even more cover for him. And I guarantee you that Trump has already let her know that he intends to do that just so he can have another stooge higher up the food chain in his pocket.
This is all deliberate. She’s not even trying to hide it. She doesn’t have to. She knows there’s zero chance she’ll be removed from the bench for it, and if Trump wins the election it won’t matter anyway and she’ll be set for life. Even if her reputation is ruined and she ends up resigning in disgrace, the right-wing-talk-show circuit is quite lucrative these days, and I guarantee you that NewsMax or OANN would scoop her up in seconds. She knows that too.
So… we gonna impeach the asshole or just accept that we can’t have nice things.
He’s already been impeached for all the good it did.
The issue is that the GOP has power, and they’ve hitched their wagon to Trump, meaning that they’ll move heaven and earth to protect him. Rules, norms, fairness, representation and integrity don’t matter one bit - it’s all self-interest.
I think they meant Cannon
I indeed meant cannon, they’re pretty openly incompetent.
“Judge Cannon is a bad judge and has made bad rulings and has favored Trump at every possible turn, number one,” former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told Salon.
…
That factor presents a “bigger problem” than Trump’s frequent delay tactics because she appears to have “lost control of the trial,” David Schultz, a Hamline University legal studies and political science professor, told Salon.
This dichotomy keenly illustrates the core problem of the legal profession in confronting the current court system and rise of fascism. Rahmani gets that judges, like everyone else, have personal motivations and may be corrupt, especially judges elevated for no good (legal) reason by the actual defendant in a trial.
Schultz, like many in the profession, are doggedly devoted to the idea that the system is good and fine and any problems that occur are just innocent mistakes by dedicated jurists in over their head. The idea that the justice system might be corrupt goes against their foundational belief system about the wheels of justice and higher callings that they preach to new students year after year, so they will inadvertently cape for those abusing it and resist calls to reform the system or delegitimize any portion of it.
She’s the sand in the cogs of the Justice system.
Crowbar, maybe
