Never say that a single person can't change the world

For almost four years, there's been a contingent of Democrats ready to lay the blame on Attorney General Merrick Garland for failing to see that Donald Trump paid for his attempt to overthrow the American government. Now that the electorate has rewarded Trump for his malfeasance, that chorus has grown louder.

And I'd like to add my voice to the mix.

However, it's not just Garland. The whole ultra-cautious "we must respect the process," tradition uber alles, and insistence that we dare not lay a foot wrong in responding to people who had just planned and executed an attack on the Capitol in which they tried to lynch members of Congress, may be the single biggest failure in American history. That's on President Joe Biden, and Garland, and special counsel Jack Smith, and everyone in between.

In the most critical moment in a century, they all failed America.

From the beginning, the process was too slow, the movements were too tentative, and the action was too ... dainty. There was a tendency to treat people who plotted and planned for the destruction of the country as if not just their rights, but their very delicate feelings, deserved protection. Trump, and others within his orbit, were given treatment that went beyond kid gloves and into a whole bespoke level of custom-tailored, velvet-lined justice unavailable to the 334 million other Americans whose rights they attempted to usurp.

Now, the nation is about to tumble into four years in which we have every reason to expect mass deportations, censorship, and the roll-back of a century of progress on racism, women's rights, and LGBTQ+ rights. People are going to be torn from their families. People are going to die.

But, you know, that goodness we didn't do anything rash.

We cannot say for certain that, when those four years are ended the vultures pecking over the bones of the American government will have left anything of value—or whether they will ever consent to leave. And that will happen because, when faced with an enormous threat, the legal system under Garland proved not up to the challenge.

But when you're next thinking about how a single person can determine the fate of the nation and seal the future for everyone—don't think of Garland. Think of this woman.

Perhaps more than any other single person, United States District Court Judge Aileen Cannon made the decisions that will decide the nation's future.

Trump named Cannon to the bench in 2020 and, according to Law 360, senators "took it easy on her" and she "avoided scrutiny" during her hearing. In one of those great demonstrations of how Democrats value tradition and institutional procedure more than anything else, Cannon was confirmed in her position as a federal district court by a 56–21 vote that took place on November 12, 2020—over a week after Trump had lost the 2020 election. Do you think Mitch McConnell would have held that vote if it had been an appointment from a lame-duck Democratic president?

Despite that last-minute gift of a confirmation, Cannon quickly demonstrated that she excelled as someone willing to put politics ahead of justice at every turn.

When a man threatened to kill a federal prosecutor appointed under Trump in 2019, Cannon tacked on 6 1/2 years to his sentence. A woman who made threats against Cannon received a three-year sentence. So when another man repeatedly threatened to kill a Democratic state prosecutor, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, federal prosecutors recommended a sentence of 41 months.

Cannon gave him just 18 months.

In addition to her lopsided notions of justice, she was immediately notable for making huge mistakes. As in the child pornography case where Cannon forgot to swear in the jury, meaning that the case had to start over from the beginning after weeks of proceedings.

And when it came to Trump, there was no precedent, rule, or law that Cannon would not break to see that he never had to face any form of justice.

In 2022, Trump's legal team put together a civil case against the Justice Department for the search that took place at Mar-a-Lago in which FBI agents recovered over 100 classified documents. Those documents included national security documents detailing information on U.S. nuclear weapons, foreign nuclear programs, classified weapons systems, and the military's plans in response to specific threats.

There are no more critical or highly classified documents and the evidence against Trump appeared bullet-proof. His employees at Mar-a-Lago were caught on camera and in phone messages moving boxes containing classified information to evade FBI searches. On Trump's instructions, his attorneys repeatedly lied to the National Archives and the FBI about the number and character of documents that Trump held. His staff even faked a "pool leak" to cover up their destruction of security records connected to the classified documents. The evidence against Trump in this case was overwhelming and the charges could not be more serious.

Trump's team took that case to the one judge they thought might help Trump out of a hole that seemed miles deep: Aileen Cannon.

In what has been repeatedly described as one of the greatest instances of malpractice from the bench, Cannon granted Trump's request for a special master and put a hold on any further progress in the case. That included denying the Justice Department the authority to continue their investigation or move forward with the case against Trump.

It was obvious to all observers that Cannon's action had one purpose: Delay the start of any trial. A month later, Cannon underscored those efforts by rejecting the ruling of the special master she had appointed. However, it took four months before the 11th Circuit removed Cannon from the case saying that she had "improperly exercised equitable jurisdiction."

As The National Law Journal wrote:

The federal appellate opinion ending the special master review of records seized from Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago home wasn't just a defeat for the former president—it reads as a rebuke of the federal trial judge who issued the initial order.

But six months later, when the criminal case was finally assigned it went to — Judge Aileen Cannon.

Immediately, Cannon applied the brakes. She granted Trump's team repeated requests for delays, froze proceedings for months, and moved the start of proceedings from October 2023 to February 2024. Then to April. Then to May. And then so delayed the necessary steps that none of those dates was remotely possible.

If Garland and Smith deserve any blame—and they do—their biggest failing was not in taking every action imaginable to see that Cannon was immediately removed from the case. Whether that meant banging on the door of the 11th until they moved the case to someone else, filing charges in another district, or more direct action against Cannon, it needed to be done.

When May finally rolled around, there was no trial. As The Guardian noted, Cannon didn't even bother with a new hearing date.

The fact that the original May trial date would not hold was a foregone conclusion and has been apparent since last year, given delays with pre-trial litigation and the number of unresolved legal issues that have only increased in recent months. ...

In doing so, the judge played into Trump’s overarching legal strategy to seek indefinite delays for his criminal cases, under the belief that winning re-election would enable him to appoint a loyalist as attorney general who could direct prosecutors to drop the charges.

In the end, that step wasn't even required. Cannon simply twiddled her thumbs until Election Day, after which Smith withdrew the charges against Trump.

Of all the state and federal cases brought against Donald Trump in the last four years, none was more serious—or more of a slam dunk—than Trump's theft and distribution of critical national defense documents.

Had this case gone to court in a timely manner, there's little doubt that a jury—even a Palm Beach jury—would have convicted Trump of illegally retaining national security documents and conspiracy to obstruct justice to cover up his acts. Barring some grant of clemency from Biden, Trump would be facing a sentence of at least 10 years. Likely longer.

Instead, he's moving back into the White House, where he will no doubt keep the next available Supreme Court chair ready to receive his friend, Aileen Cannon. She's already getting in some practice for Clarence Thomas's seat by ignoring the rules of judicial ethics and accepting free trips from Republican donors.

No one can say she isn't ready to take a place on the Roberts court. Or that she didn't earn it.