For the most part, the enemies of President Donald Trump have won on the second level by putting cases in front of judges that generally hate Trump. But there one major exception is in Florida with Judge Aileen Cannon. She has been a thorn in the side of Special Counsel Jack Smith and on Monday night she may have delivered the death blow to his classified documents case.

Here’s the news generated from corporate media reports…

The MAGA-friendly federal judge, appointed by President Trump himself, is taking a strong stance in the Mar-a-Lago classified records case. She’s forcing prosecutors to make a tough choice: either let jurors see a huge trove of national secrets or let Trump go. This judge, Aileen M. Cannon, has consistently sided with Trump, and she’s using this opportunity to swing the case in his favor once again.

Special Counsel Jack Smith now faces a dilemma. He must decide whether to allow jurors to examine the classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago or give them instructions that would likely lead to Trump’s acquittal. Smith could appeal to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, but that would delay the trial even further.

Trump, along with two of his associates, has been indicted on 39 felony counts for hoarding classified documents without authorization and attempting to cover it up. Trump argues that these documents were his “personal” files and therefore he had the right to keep them. He also claims that the country’s national security laws are “too vague” to be used against him.

While some saw Cannon’s decision last Thursday to not dismiss the case as a victory for Smith, it was more of a strategic move to set up her ultimatum on Monday. Now, prosecutors must decide whether to show jurors the classified records or inform them that a president has the sole authority to categorize records as personal or presidential during their term.

The first option would require Smith to allow any potential jurors in this rural Florida area to suddenly have access to these sensitive national secrets. The second option would essentially force jurors to acquit Trump, as they would be told he had the power to claim personal ownership over any government document within his reach.

In her two-page ruling, Cannon proposed a new version of the law without a lengthy judicial order to back it up. This proposed jury instruction would state: “A president has sole authority under the [Presidential Records Act] to categorize records as personal or presidential during his/her presidency. Neither a court nor a jury is permitted to make or review such a categorization decision.”

Cannon argues that the Presidential Records Act is unclear about how to allow a president to make this kind of determination, even though the law was passed in 1978 to ensure that White House records are considered government property and overseen by responsible historians and librarians at the National Archives.

In essence, the judge’s reading of the law would give extensive authority to any president, but most importantly, it would give Trump exactly what he wants: the ability to give himself the final word.

Judge Aileen Cannon, presiding over the case in the Southern District of Florida, denied the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) request to keep sealed filings, striking two from the record. Additionally, Cannon requested further information from prosecutors regarding the use of an out-of-state grand jury to investigate the case.

In the brief, Cannon stated, “The Special Counsel states in conclusory terms that the supplement should be sealed from public view ‘to comport with grand jury secrecy,’ but the motion for leave and the supplement plainly fail to satisfy the burden of establishing a sufficient legal or factual basis to warrant sealing the motion and supplement.” Consequently, the DOJ’s request was denied.

Cannon also emphasized that the response from prosecutors should address the legality of using an out-of-district grand jury to continue the investigation or seek post-indictment hearings on matters relevant to the indicted matter in the district.

This filing was made in response to the special counsel’s request for a hearing to review defense attorney Stanley Woodward’s potential conflicts of interest. Woodward, who represents Trump aide Waltine Nauta, a co-defendant in the case, also represents three individuals who may testify in the trial.

Cannon set a deadline of August 17 for Nauta’s counsel to file a response to the motion for a hearing and until August 22 for prosecutors to file a brief supporting the hearing.

The recent developments in the case occurred approximately nine months ahead of the scheduled trial, which is set to begin in May 2024 during the Republican presidential primaries.

Trump faces 37 counts, including charges of willful retention of national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice, and making false statements. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Nauta, charged with six counts, including conspiracy to obstruct justice, has also pleaded not guilty. Carlos De Oliveira, the third defendant, a property manager at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach, Florida, is accused by the special counsel of colluding with Trump to conceal security footage.

Special Counsel Jack Smith expressed the Department of Justice’s commitment to upholding the rule of law, stating, “Adherence to the rule of law is a bedrock principle of the Department of Justice. And our nation’s commitment to the rule of law sets an example for the world. We have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone. Applying those laws, collecting facts, that’s what determines the outcome of an investigation, nothing more, nothing less.”

Smith also commended the prosecutors in his office for their expertise and ethical standards in investigating the case, assuring that they will continue to uphold these standards throughout the proceedings.

Article generated from corporate media reports.

Federal Judge Aileen Mercedes Cannon, 41, was nominated by President Trump in 2020 and confirmed by the Senate after the presidential election. She made the announcement Saturday that a hearing about assigning a “Special Master” will be held on September 1. According to Fox News:

Trump and his legal team filed a motion Monday evening seeking an independent review of the records seized by the FBI during its raid of Mar-a-Lago earlier this month, saying the decision to search his private residence just months before the 2022 midterm elections “involved political calculations aimed at diminishing the leading voice in the Republican Party, President Trump.”

U.S. District Judge from the Southern District of Florida Judge Aileen M. Cannon on Saturday afternoon said that the decision was made upon the review of Trump’s submissions and “the exceptional circumstances presented.”

“Pursuant to Rule 53(b) (1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Court’s inherent authority, and without prejudice to the parties’ objections, the Court hereby provides notice of its preliminary intent to appoint a special master in this case,” Cannon wrote in a filing Saturday.

A hearing is set for Sept. 1 at 1:00 p.m. in West Palm Beach, Fla. Cannon also ordered the Justice Department to file a response by Aug. 30 and provide, “under seal,” a “more detailed Receipt for Property specifying all property seized pursuant to the search warrant executed on August 8, 2022.”

The current property receipt shows that FBI agents took approximately 20 boxes of items from the premises, including one set of documents marked as “Various classified/TS/SCI documents,” which refers to top secret/sensitive compartmented information.

Records covered by that government classification level could potentially include human intelligence and information that, if disclosed, could jeopardize relations between the U.S. and other nations, as well as the lives of intelligence operatives abroad. However, the classification also encompasses national security information related to the daily operations of the president of the United States.

The property receipt also showed that FBI agents collected four sets of top secret documents, three sets of secret documents and three sets of confidential documents, but the document does not reveal any details about any of those records.

Trump’s team has accused the FBI of breaching both attorney-client privilege as well as executive privilege with their raid. If confirmed by a special master who would review all documents, it could send the Department of Justice’s whole case to the garbage bin of Deep State history.