ABC News contributor Dan Abrams claimed by Florida picking Judge Aileen Cannon to oversee the beginnings of the Trump trail, it was a good thing because then the MAGA cult won't just focus on the judge.
Has Abrams been really paying attention to the way the Republican Party, Trump, his supporters in and out of Congress and in the media have acted since 2016?
Here's the transcript from ABC's This Week:
STEPHANOPOULOS: Dan, let's talk about how this case is likely to play out. One of the first things we've found out, it's been assigned to this judge. You've had jurisdiction over the Trump case earlier.
ABRAMS: Yeah, Aileen Cannon. We don't know if she's going to actually have the trial itself. We know she's going to have the early portion of this case.
STEPHANOPOULOS: What would prevent her from having the trial there?
ABRAMS: Well, look, they're going to determine down the road who the judge is going to be in the case. But for now, she's handling the first hearing in the case. And look, and I think that's a good thing. It's a good thing because at least the focus won't be on who the judge is, right? Because in a lot of these cases you see Donald Trump is saying, this judge is biased against me. There's no way he can argue this judge is biased against him. He appointed this judge. This judge had a favorable ruling to him. It was ultimately overruled by the appellate court. And these initial proceedings I don't think are going to make or break the case either.
You know, it's going to be interesting to see what are the early motions that they make. We know already what some of the legal arguments that they're going to make are, but what are they going to try and keep out of evidence? What are they going to say shouldn't be admitted, et cetera? That's going to be interesting in the early days of the case.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Preet, one thing this judge could control is the timing of the case. I read a lot of analysts saying that the fact that Aileen Cannon has now been put in charge of the case, at least initially, guarantees -- or all but guarantees that this case will not be -- go to trial before the 2024 election.
BHARARA: Yeah, look. I mean, at one point, further what Dan said about whether or not she will continue to be on the case, I imagine that the government is thinking about making a former recusal motion, not on the ground that she was appointment by Donald Trump, but in the ground that earlier on the case she ruled very favorably, arguably in a biased fashion in favor of Donald Trump in a way that was roundly rejected by the appellate court, in -- in language that was quite strong.
ABRAMS: But they won't win that.
BHARARA: Maybe.
ABRAMS: Yeah.
BHARARA: But, you know --
ABRAMS: Don't we think it would be a mistake though for them to make that motion in early days to already try and get the judge dismissed?
BHARARA: I don't know. That early decision was remarkably bad.
ABRAMS: Yeah.
It's impossible to use logic and reality while discussing Trump's criminal and immoral behavior. It doesn't matter if Judge Cannon was a Trump appointee who gave one the most ridiculous rulings (that was quick lapped down by 11th Circuit Court of Appeals) we've seen during the initial probe into the confiscated documents by the FBI at Mar-A-Lago.
If Judge Cannon attempts to operate like a impartial jurist she will be savagely ridiculed by the entire GOP. Theyll question whether the "deep state" got to her or she's always been in their pockets.
Abrams is no fool, so I was surprised by what he said.
Keeping Judge Cannon as far away from this case as possible is the prudent thing to do.
Logic doesn't enter into the discussion with the MAGA cult, ever.
