To recap: On August 8, 2022, the FBI executed a search warrant and lawfully removed from Trump’s possession stuff that doesn’t belong to him. He ran to Judge Cannon, an appointee of his, and got her to appoint a Special Master to scour that stuff for things that the FBI shouldn’t see/have or should return to Trump because it’s his. (Cannon’s original ruling extended to classified documents, a ruling for which the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals spanked her. The classified stuff is no longer part of the Special Master exercise.)
Per Cannon’s instructions, the Special Master, Judge Dearie — the choice of both sides, mind you — put in place a plan for the review of the stuff the FBI took. His sensible first step was to set a baseline for an inventory, the aim being to define the universe within which he was to do his work. (Worth mentioning: Dearie’s a retired federal judge from New York, a guy with a reputation for seriousness and probity, albeit a Republican, pre-wacko). As required, DOJ provided the inventory, supported by sworn statements to the effect of, Yup, this is all the stuff we took.
To stoke his people, Trump publicly — but not in court filings — jabbered nonsense about the FBI’s having planted evidence. Dearie, in a put-up-or-shut-up move, gave him a “final opportunity” to object to DOJ’s version of the inventory. To do that, Trump would have to object in writing and under oath and specify the items in the inventory (i) not taken by the FBI on August 8; (ii) not correctly described as to content or location from which the FBI had taken them; and (iii) taken by the FBI but not included in the inventory.
Aggrieved by the duty to proffer facts rather than wind — and threatened by its interference with the aim to delay the Special Master exercise beyond the mid-terms (the assumption being that, once Republicans controlled the House, public pressure would compel DOJ to stop its investigation of him) — Trump ran back to Cannon and filed (curiously, under seal) his objections to Dearie’s requirements. Dearie’s requirements exceed the authority that Cannon had granted him, Trump said, even though Dearie’s sole objective at this stage was to get a consensus on the universe of documents for Dearie to review.
Cannon dutifully ruled for Trump who, she said, “has no separate requirement … at this stage, prior to the review of [the stuff the FBI took], to lodge ex ante final objections to the accuracy of [the inventory], its descriptions, or its contents.” Effectively, she gave Trump license to gum to death the Special Master process that he had begged for. She has guaranteed serial objections (vs. all-at-once, up-front) to virtually every item in the inventory. Trump will squawk to Dearie, end up unhappy, and race back to Cannon for relief. At this rate, Trump’ll be dead before Dearie’s done … which may be the ultimate goal.
Cannon went further. First, she usurped Dearie by imposing her own deadlines for the Special Master process; December 16 replaces November 30 as the date for completion, a “modest enlargement”. Second, she overruled Dearie’s requirement that Trump assert privilege “on a rolling basis;” he now can submit “one final comprehensive log” at the end. In light of her refusal to compel Trump to an up-front acknowledgment of the inventory, and her giving him the right to delay assertions of privilege until Dearie has finished his review, it’s unclear whether she’s deluded or disingenuous.
Which gets to the heart of the matter, namely, her motive. We previously suggested aspirations to a seat on a higher court. On further thought, this assessment is too superficial. Certainly, Trump’s case is a no-lose proposition for her. Even if reversed on appeal (as she has been already in part), she’ll have established street cred with future Republicans filling an 11th Circuit or even Supreme Court seat. Loyalty is the ultimate value among that crowd, a loyalty that she has demonstrated in this case more than once, and for which she may one day be rewarded.
But does a closer look at her rulings tell us something more, something about her character, the kind of person she is beyond the banality of career aspirations? For starters, there is her insistence on taking the case. Not a word from her about Trump’s judge shopping, his filing a case in St. Lucie County (where Cannon is the only judge), not, as required, in Palm Beach County where the “harm” occurred. Silence, too, on the existing proceedings before Judge Reinhardt. Her sense of self-importance caused her to take the case, likely the most high-profile matter she’ll ever see as a District Judge.
Then comes condescension. It’s in the second paragraph of her September 5 Order. She reports being “mindful of the need to ensure at least the appearance of fairness and integrity…”. Given her ruling in favor of Trump — an outcome she foretold by saying, before having heard DOJ on the matter, that she was “inclined” to grant Trump’s request for a Special Master — her reference to “at least the appearance of” means, I have to make me look fair, even though I intend to reject the US Government’s position, whatever it is, because I think the president is being treated shabbily.
To justify her taking the case at all, she had to — and did — find “extraordinary circumstances”. It turns out, though, that, as she subsequently tells us, the extraordinariness is nothing more than Trump’s “former position as President of the United States”. She cites no law for the proposition that private citizen Trump is entitled to special legal treatment because of his previous job. She also skips the part about the FBI’s very much un-extraordinary execution of a judge-authorized search warrant. To do otherwise would have had her to surrender a chance in the national spotlight. Self-effacement isn’t her thing.
To justify her ruling in Trump’s favor on his demand for a Special Master, arrogance and dishonesty drove her to ignore pointed language from applicable case law. Specifically, although she agreed that there had been no “showing of callous disregard for [Trump’s] constitutional rights,” she conveniently ignored legal precedent that made this the “foremost consideration,” even an “indispensab[le]” one. The 11th Circuit made short work of this “oversight”: “The absence of this ‘indispensab[le]’ factor … is reason enough to conclude that [Cannon] abused [her] discretion” by taking the case.
Cannon’s blast of grandiosity topped off her decision. She credited Trump’s claim of reputational harm arising out of the possibility of prosecution and the stigma that comes with it. “As a function of [Trump’s] former position as [president], the stigma associated with the … seizure is in a league of its own. A future indictment … would result in reputational harm of a decidedly different order of magnitude.” It blinded her to the obvious and, again, required the 11th Circuit to set her straight: The mere threat of prosecution is not irreparable harm. If it were, the circumstances no longer would be “extraordinary” as required.
In sum, in her handling of the case, Cannon not only plays to a specific audience and, clearly, wants Trump to win his battle with the “Deep State”. She has a deeply personal agenda, one based not only on career ambition, but also on a disturbing arrogance and inflated self-importance, neither of which she hesitates to display. A Trump appointee in his image; all that’s missing is the spite, though that’ll surely come when she’s ultimately overruled again on appeal. Worth mentioning: 12 Democrats voted to confirm her, and 12 Democrats didn’t bother to show up for the vote.
