OPINION:
District Judge Aileen Cannon told the Department of Justice to stand down and leave alone the documents the agency minions removed from Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home until a special master had a chance to review them.
And now water carriers for the deep staters who’ve poisoned America’s federal law enforcement agencies are up in arms, whining that Cannon was a Trump appointee and therefore, biased, and therefore, unfit to rule on the case.
Well, isn’t that the pot calling the kettle black.
If Cannon’s unfit to serve on this case simply because she was appointed by Trump — an argument that’s flimsy in itself, as it would ultimately lead to questions about the ability of any judge to serve on any case tied to anyone who made his or her appointment — but if Cannon’s unfit due to bias, then what about the judge who signed the Mar-a-Lago search warrant in the first place?
Judge Bruce Reinhart recused himself from Trump’s defamation suit against Hillary Clinton and other Democrats over their roles in promoting the false Russia collusion claims. Six weeks later, though, Reinhart signed the search warrant that unleashed the FBI on Trump’s personal residence.
Hmm.
“It is surprising that a judge was recused themselves in a case involving one party, but not a second case involving the same party,” said Neama Rahmini, a former federal prosecutor, in Newsweek. “The only logical way it would make sense is if he has some pro-Hillary Clinton bias, but he’s neutral when it comes to Trump.”
That’s a fact.
And yet, when it comes to Cannon — this: “The decision is viewed as unusual and has triggered some criticism of District Judge Aileen Cannon, the Trump appointee who issued the order … and who some argue appeared too solicitous of the former president,” The Hill wrote.
Whah.
Leftists, if nothing else, are astonishingly hypocritical.
“‘Deeply Problematic’: Experts Question Judge’s Intervention in Trump Inquiry,” The New York Times wrote right above a second headline that made clear this judge was “appointed by former President Donald J. Trump.” Within the piece, this sly bias: “Siding with Mr. Trump …,” followed by a mention of Cannon’s ruling.
From CNN, meanwhile — “Opinion: Judge’s ruling for Trump is astonishing.” That commentary opened with this: “Cannon issued a stunning, if not entirely surprising, order …”
The takeaway is supposed to be this: that Cannon, a Trump appointee, issued a pro-Trump political ruling without care or concern for the Constitution. The left is so full of it.
Once again, this is an example of water carriers for the Democrats and deep state and Trump-haters accusing of what they themselves are guilty.
• Cheryl Chumley can be reached at cchumley@washingtontimes.com or on Twitter, @ckchumley. Listen to her podcast “Bold and Blunt” by clicking HERE. And never miss her column; subscribe to her newsletter and podcast by clicking HERE. Her latest book, “Lockdown: The Socialist Plan To Take Away Your Freedom,” is available by clicking HERE or clicking HERE or CLICKING HERE.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.