When Judge Aileen Cannon was picked to preside over Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago classified documents case, many legal experts were skeptical of how she'd handle it — considering the fact that she was appointed by the former president.
Although slated to begin at the end of this month, Cannon postponed trial for the case indefinitely earlier this week — which many legal experts criticized — saying, "Claiming it would be 'imprudent and inconsistent with the Court’s duty to fully and fairly consider the various pending pre-trial motions before the Court,' along with other matters."
She wrote, “The Court finds that the ends of justice served by this continuance…outweigh the best interest of the public and Defendants in a speedy trial."
READ MORE: Trump said trial kept him from campaigning — but he’s using day off to dine with NFT buyers
Speaking with legal analyst and former FBI counsel Andrew Weissman Wednesday, MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace emphasized that she, too, was skeptical of Cannon's appointment to Trump's case from the beginning.
"The beginning of this case's existence ends up before a very conservative circuit court, and then ends up at a special master in Brooklyn because she still botches it," Wallace said. "And so it seems to me — again, I'm not a lawyer, never worked at the Justice Department — but it seemed to me from the beginning that it was ill-fated if your goal was to hold him accountable for the crimes you've indicted him for."
Weissmann replied, "As you know, I'm somebody who will tell you if I think the Department of Justice made a mistake. But I actually don't think that [special counsel] Jack [Smith] made a mistake here. I think he played it straight. I've been on high-profile cases where the issue is what venue should you pick, and the overarching issue is to play it straight. Where are the facts that sort of form the crime? Where did they occur? You know, that principle is in the Constitution — that you should be tried where the crime occurred."
He continued, "And here, only in the district where Judge Cannon is one of three judges, is a locust for all of the crimes charged. In other words, some of the crimes might have been charged elsewhere, but not all of them, and there's no question that the gravamen — all of the facts — are ones that could all be charged in that district. And so there was going to be a one out of three chance under the wheel, as it gets spun randomly, that she got the case."
READ MORE: 'Scratch off the Georgia trial': Experts say second Trump case likely delayed past election
The ex-FBI lawyer emphasized, "And the real issue here, I think, is not really Jack Smith. It is Judge Cannon. It is just truly a disgrace that she is not doing her job. You pointed out, Nicolle, that she couldn't even handle the search warrant. She was reversed, not once, but twice over that. She had to get another federal judge to be the special master, when she could have just rolled up her sleeves and done the work. And now her decision says, 'Well, there are a lot of pending motions, that's why I need to take more time.' Well, I have another idea: Decide them."
Weissmann concluded, "This is not a complicated case, and so I agree with [former Trump lawyer] Ty Cobb that she just put in writing what we all knew was going to happen. But what she put in writing is really sort of a testament to, at the very least, incompetence and some might say, much worse than that, which is something that you don't want to see in a judge, which is a bias for one side or the other. So, I really think that's where the problem is in this case."
Watch the video below or at this link.
Legal expert: 'Truly a disgrace' that Judge Cannon 'is not doing her job' www.youtube.com
