Aileen Cannon Called Out For Playing ‘Dangerous Game’ in Trump Trial

Judge Aileen Cannon’s decision to allow Donald Trump to make false statements about the FBI is deemed risky by a former prosecutor. Concerns arise over the potential harm to FBI agents due to Trump’s misleading claims, including an untrue assertion about the agency using lethal force against him.

Cannon, appointed by Trump, oversees the Mar-a-Lago case involving allegations of unlawfully retaining classified documents and obstruction of federal officials by the former president.

Trump has entered a plea of not guilty to the charges, maintaining that the retained documents were personal and denying any wrongdoing in the case.

In court, Smith has requested a modification to Trump’s bail terms to prevent the Republican from making misleading claims about the FBI.

This request came after an FBI search warrant application was made public, revealing that agents were prepared to use lethal force if required.

Similar language is customary in such applications, as seen in a previous case when FBI agents were retrieving presidential papers from President Joe Biden.

Cannon has already reviewed filings from both prosecutors and Trump’s legal team. She has postponed the request to adjust bail conditions by three weeks to allow for additional submissions to be made.

“No one will ever accuse her of dealing with matters in an expeditious fashion. But she plays a dangerous and disingenuous game here. Someone could get hurt in the intervening three weeks,” Vance penned on Sunday in her legal publication, Civil Discourse.

Vance has consistently voiced disapproval of the ex-president.

“Special counsel Jack Smith has asked Judge Aileen Cannon—again—to bar Trump from making statements that endanger law enforcement in the classified documents case,” Vance wrote.

“Trump has been claiming that the FBI was out to assassinate him when it executed the search warrant at Mar-a-Lago. It simply isn’t the case.”

Vance mentioned that Cannon rejected Smith’s request based on a technical issue. Smith resubmitted the motion on Sunday, and the judge “entered a paperless order directing Trump to file a response on or before June 14 and the government to reply by June 21.”

Vance mentioned that Cannon rejected Smith’s request based on a technical issue. Smith resubmitted the motion on Sunday, and the judge “entered a paperless order directing Trump to file a response on or before June 14 and the government to reply by June 21.”

Trump insinuated in social media posts that FBI agents were instructed by the Biden administration to use lethal force against him. Referring to a motion Smith presented to Cannon on Friday, May 24, advocates of the ex-president like Steve Bannon echoed these assertions.

In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump mentioned that the Department of Justice “AUTHORIZED THE FBI TO USE DEADLY (LETHAL) FORCE.”

Furthermore, a communication from the Trump campaign stated that FBI agents were “authorized to shoot” the Republican candidate, while also implicating President Joe Biden was “locked & loaded and ready to take me out.”

Within his motion, Smith requested a modification to Trump’s bail terms to prevent him from making allegations against the FBI, which Smith believes endangers agents from Trump’s followers.

In response, Trump’s attorneys, Chris Kise and Todd Blanche, submitted a detailed counterargument accusing Smith and the prosecution team of attempting to curb Trump’s freedom of speech. They also urged Cannon to penalize Smith and his associates for failing to consult with Trump’s legal representatives before initiating the motion.

Cannon supported their position strongly and criticized Smith for disregarding customary lawyer etiquette by not consulting with them before submitting the motion.