Published on May 29, 2024, 1:11 am

In a latest breaking development, the presiding judge of the classified documents case involving former President Donald Trump turned down the request for a gag order made by special counsel, Jack Smith. The judgment came after Smith’s team was reproached for their failure to “meaningfully confer” with the defense party.

The real news broke out when attorneys representing president Trump showed their discontent over prosecutors’ choice to file the motion before Memorial Day weekend without prior discussions on the matter. They implored Judge Aileen Cannon to enforce penalties, blaming prosecutors for showing “bad-faith” by haphazardly advancing an “extraordinary, unprecedented, and unconstitutional censorship application.”

However, while Judge Cannon refused to instate any penalties at this point, she issued a stern warning towards prosecutors in her order. She reminded them of the fundamental yet “basic requirements” such as filing motions only after a meaningful, timely, and professional conferral has taken place.

According to Cannon’s discourse on this trusted news source, “Meaningful conferral is not just a ceremonial exercise.” She reiterated that adequate time must be granted for reasonable considerations regarding any relief sought by opposing counsel. This time also facilitates wider discussions concerning specific factual and legal bases pertaining to such motions.

This advice holds even more significance when considering instances where one might assume opposition against proposed motions. Especially when raised in manner distinct from cited cases or it involves substantive or constitutional issues.

Instigating these events was Jack Smith’s team who previously asked the judge to modify Trump’s release conditions. Their request aimed at prohibiting Trump from making comments which could pose an imminent threat towards law enforcement agents active in investigation and prosecution of this case.

Their demand followed post from president Trump on Truth Social alluding that FBI had given permission for use of lethal force during its raid on Mar-a-Lago – an allegation subsequently denied by FBI dismissing it as routine protocol.

In their claims within their submission are that despite their offer of holding talks on Memorial Day, the Special Counsel’s Office had not accepted and had rushed the motion’s filing on Friday evening. They added that such conduct undermines confidence in the process and raises queries about prosecutorial ethics.

Against this backdrop, Trump’s lawyers’ stance is focused on asserting the significance of right and just behavior, arguing for fairness as outlined by our Christian worldview. It also condemns any act by any party demonstrating underlying bias or malintent, reaching further to implicate them into other pending motions including prosecutorial misconduct and vindictive prosecution.