ex-President Trump

The argument against a bench trial is why take the judgment of a random academic over 12 people you can choose?

Why would a con man like trump would want one or 3 judges to determines if his guilty or not ?
He knows he couldn’t swindle judges about the law , it would be suicide lol .

trump loves non judicial jurors so he can try swindle them like he did half the country …

Because it isn't a random academic rather 3 in my proposal, and it isn't an academic rather a law expert trained to be impartial and selected ab origine by the political process, not self selected by the academic caste.

And remember that the idea starts from "we don't think we can select 12 impartial people", of course if you disagree with that we will keep the jury

I think they can be more impartial because of training, reputational damage, peer and media pressure.

And at the very least they can put their effort in it in full because they are being paid decent money to do so unlike the jury.

It isn't a perfect solution but it is better than the current situation, for cases of exceptional notoriety of the defendant.

Btw I also think Cannon should have recused herself, or be recused by the appeal court

Says a lot about the country that half got swindled by someone notorious for swindling.

I find it hard to believe that anyone selected by a political process will be unbiased. The current Supreme Court justices certainly are not.

Why? Did she miss the "how to be impartial" judge trainings?

literally never been a judge before Trump nominated her, so yes she missed judge training lol

(i am bigly against anyone ever being a prosecutor becoming a judge and viceversa, we need checks and balances and a complete separation of accusatorial power, which is executive power, and judicial power)

If you're innocent go for the bench trial, if you're guilty go for the jury. imo

The one that baffled me is no access to the witness list from the prosecution till 24 hours before and than the Stormy Daniels testimony most which seemed irrelevant.

We were discussing the judge overseeing proceedings for the mar-a-lago documents case which is as biased pro trump if not more, as the judge was against trump in the NYS civil fraud case

This is not quite correct. The defense has had a potential witness list for a long time. What they don't have is notice who the prosecution plans to call on what day. The prosecution is not required to provide this. Any notification is just a courtesy.

Text I got from my brother a couple hours ago about an interaction my 73 year old middle eastern mom had at a Costco

Assuming we’re the bad people for just assuming this person was a right wing nut. Sorry blah blah Mike

have you considered not being middle eastern though?

It’s true. That’s definitely my bad

Without even looking, I can assure you that witness lists were exchanged. I don't know whether the prosecution was required to specify the order in which they planned to call witnesses. Maybe not.

Most judges who are appointed to the bench in federal district court were not judges before being nominated. Moving from the state court bench to the federal bench isn't much of a thing in the U.S.

And afaik, all new federal judges go to judge school.

That women who accosted your mom sounds psychotic. It's one thing to road rage, but it's another thing to road rage and then say to yourself, "that old lady has a nice jacket. I'm going to take it."

Very weird.

I don't know for certain, but I highly doubt you are correct. I assume that it just went remote like everything else.

which as you know means basically not doing it

How would he, or anyone else, know that is true?

But since you apparently have insight into this, perhaps you can share your in-depth knowledge of the remote training they went through, and why it meant "basically not doing it"?

the disaster of remote education caused by covid mismanagement has been documented extensively, and here we are in an even worse situation, one of courses you can actually disregard anyway if you don't care too much, just try to imagine someone who couldn't care less to attend in person if he had to, having to log in remotely to pretend she is listening, what she can learn.

but nvmnd

Judges aren’t kids .
Want to be judges already have a pretty good grasp of what law is.
You know autodidact is a real phenomenon….

Ps: AI with virtual reality is probably the future of education at home .

they don't need to pass an exam to become federal judges