Should Judge Aileen Cannon recuse herself, in the case against Ryan Wesley Routh (Trump's attempted assassin.)(Details.)

Appomatox? Do you mean ‘appointed’?

Cannon probably should recuse, but she hasn’t on the other Trump-related suit, leading to all sorts of allegations that she is throwing the lawsuit in Trump’s advantage. But she resisted the calls for recusal.

I doubt she will. But then, she was bought and paid for.

She should be disbarred and/or in jail, let alone recuse herself.

No idea how my auto-correct, decides what words I “meant to type.”

I should have proofread.
Apologies…

I’d say no. If she had a history of contributing to Trump of had shown favoritism him in the past, I’d say she should not be on any of his cases. Ditto that if one of his political opponents was on trial in her court room. If she had shown that she only supported Repubs and a Democrat politician came into her court I’d say she should recuse. If she has a family member that is benefiting from a case or has close beneficial relationship with Trump, she should recuse herself.

This entire argument about who appointed who is just ridiculous. The process of being appointed to a federal judgeship is far more than a POTUS saying “You are my choice. Go forth and do good!”. This article shows the steps that go into filling a vacancy on a bench. In the case of Cannon, yes, Trump nominated her. But he didn’t do it in a vacuum. He didn’t just pull her name out of a hat. Many, many people were involved in putting her on the bench…both Democrats and Republicans.

^It’s NOT a big deal, to me.
I would think ANY judge, would treat Routh as an assassin. A criminal, of an extremely high caliber now.

However. If you can find any articles that give specifics, it seems like Routh’s defense has a valid argument for Cannon to recuse herself.
Although. Upon further thought, I suppose I could say that ANY judge, would potentially be currying favor from Trump, by being harsh on Routh….

And any defense attorney would try muddying the waters to help his/her client. And the push by that attorney is up against the exact same thing I just pointed out. Making it out that Trump unilaterally put her into her position is a fallacy.

^It’s only fallacy, because Trump wouldn’t know how to do presidential things, without some help. Trump found out, on the fly, he couldn’t just do whatever he wanted.

Like his election fraud phone conversation, he likely told someone who did know what they were doing, and they got it done.

It’s rather moot, as I do want Routh to not be incarcerated for the rest of his life.

@MrGrimm888 No, it’s fallacy because the governing process doesn’t allow a POTUS to directly put judges, or really any high ranking people, into place by themselves. It requires a cooperative effort with the Senate. Always. Anyone that is in a position where they could act as a functionary or representative of the government has to be appointed via this process. It is the same process all POTUS’ have to go through. The only time it gets truly biased is when you have a senate that is largely the same party as the POTUS.