Judge Aileen Cannon favors prosecutors in battle over classified documents seized from Mar-a-Lago raid, Internet says 'welcome to reality'

PALM BEACH, FLORIDA: Federal Judge Aileen Cannon seemed to side with prosecutors during a hearing where Donald Trump’s lawyers challenged the FBI search warrant used to raid Mar-a-Lago. The hearing was part of the ongoing case involving classified documents found at Trump’s private club.

Emil Bove, Trump’s lawyer, raised objections to the warrant, claiming it was overly broad. He argued that the warrant allowed agents to search the entire sprawling property in West Palm Beach, a task conducted while Trump was away.

Dispute over warrant

"We’re not talking about the search of a single-family home in the suburbs," Bove stated. He contended that the warrant wasn’t specific enough to justify such an extensive search.

Judge Cannon, however, appeared unconvinced by Bove’s arguments. She commented, "I have a hard time seeing what more needed to be included," indicating that she found the warrant sufficiently detailed.

Cannon did not issue an immediate ruling but expressed skepticism about the claim that the warrant was unconstitutional, noting it "seems like it is" particularized enough.

The hearing also featured a heated exchange between prosecutor David Harbach and Trump’s legal team. Harbach accused Trump’s team of "hijacking the hearing," which Cannon deemed "not fair."

Harbach, a seasoned prosecutor with a history of high-profile political corruption cases, later apologized for his tone during a contentious courtroom exchange with Cannon.

"I just want to apologize about earlier,” Harbach said following a contentious courtroom exchange. “I didn’t mean to be unprofessional. I’m sorry about that.” 

This came after Cannon questioned the prosecution's claims about threats to law enforcement personnel and Trump’s incendiary language about the FBI.

Cannon admonished Harbach, stating, "I don’t appreciate your tone," and told him she would "appreciate decorum at all times." She then warned, "If you aren’t able to do that, I’m sure one of your colleagues can take up arguing this motion."

Trump's public statements and challenges to Special Counsel Jack Smith’s authority

Prosecutors are seeking to modify Trump’s conditions of release to prohibit public attacks on law enforcement. This request follows Trump’s public accusations that the FBI planned to assassinate him during the Mar-a-Lago raid.

Trump posted on social media, "Crooked Joe Biden’s DOJ, in their Illegal and UnConstitutional Raid of Mar-a-Lago, AUTHORIZED THE FBI TO USE DEADLY (LETHAL) FORCE. NOW WE KNOW, FOR SURE, THAT JOE BIDEN IS A SERIOUS THREAT TO DEMOCRACY. HE IS MENTALLY UNFIT TO HOLD OFFICE — 25TH AMENDMENT!"

And in a fundraising email to supporters, Trump said, "Joe Biden was locked & loaded ready to take me out & put my family in danger."

Prosecutors argue that such statements create a "grossly misleading impression" and unjustifiably endanger law enforcement professionals. "These deceptive and inflammatory claims expose the law enforcement professionals who are involved in this case to unjustified and unacceptable risks," they wrote. 

In another part of the hearing, Trump’s legal team challenged the funding and authority of Special Counsel Jack Smith, who is leading the classified documents case against Trump.

Judge Cannon questioned whether there was a limit to the congressional funding supporting Smith’s office. Emil Bove argued that Smith’s funding is contrary to rules governing congressional appropriations, asserting, "There is no check on the scope of what's going on here."

Assistant Special Counsel James Pearce defended the funding, stating it is the "full commitment of the DOJ" to ensure the special counsel’s office can continue its prosecution. Pearce confirmed that the DOJ had $1 billion at its disposal, even if current funding streams were altered.

"But when it's limitless, there is a separation of powers concern," Cannon responded. 

Judge Cannon has postponed a May trial date for Trump’s classified documents case and has not set a new date, raising the likelihood that the trial may not occur before the November elections. Critics argue that Cannon’s willingness to entertain extensive arguments from Trump’s team and outside parties has allowed for significant delays.

David Aronberg, the state attorney for Palm Beach County, called the situation "mind-boggling," highlighting the lengthy history of special prosecutors in the US legal system. Critics have also noted Cannon’s reluctance to make rulings that could be appealed, suggesting she is cautious about being recused from the case, the Daily Mail reported.

Social media reacts to courtroom exchange between Judge Cannon and Trump's defense

That said, Trump’s critics welcomed Cannon’s apparent pushback against his defense team.

"Welcome to reality, Judge Cannon," one posted on X.

"She is reluctant to make a ruling that will be appealed. She knows it would be the last straw before she is recused," another insisted.

"Oh you know it’s bad for Trump if his most loyal of judges can’t help him," someone else quipped.

"She best watch out or the MAGA types that were holding her up on their shoulders will metaphorically throw her to the ground and thrash her for that kind of talk," read a comment.

"Average citizens fail to realize how much power judges have; just the ability to withhold evidence alone can make or break a case," another offered.

 

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.