Judge in Trump case in Georgia sets hearing over Fani Willis conflict-of-interest claims

[JonnyF]

This woman clearly has no ethics. What a disgrace. No surprise she is a Democrat. The hypocrisy of these people is astounding. 

 

I wonder how long before she plays the race card - oh... wait a minute...

[impulse]

52 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Was that rant not hilarious? 

 

I was almost expecting a bolt of lightning.  

 

Of course, at the time the receipts weren't in about pay scale discrepancies, so the rant gets better and better each time new info is revealed and exposes more fibs.

 

BTW, I can't post a link, but you may want to Google "Georgia state senate special committee "  Case LC 47 2726  It could get interesting in about a week.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, jerrymahoney said:

It is the mechanics of the case that are at risk. So now there are motions and response to motions and hearings that would be totally unnecessary except for the possible violations of state law that are now being discussed.

‘Mechanics of the case’?

 

The divorce court judge will examine if Willis has an argument to negate the subpoena that calls for her testimony, Willis has made compelling arguments to court in her filing.

 

The criminal court judge will examine if the allegations have any legal bearing on the criminal case and if they present evidence of the defendant’s rights having been infringed. The accuser has made a very weak argument with zero grounds or evidence of his rights to a fair trial having been infringed.

 

 

[jerrymahoney]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

‘Mechanics of the case’?

 

The divorce court judge will examine if Willis has an argument to negate the subpoena that calls for her testimony, Willis has made compelling arguments to court in her filing.

 

The criminal court judge will examine if the allegations have any legal bearing on the criminal case and if they present evidence of the defendant’s rights having been infringed. The accuser has made a very weak argument with zero grounds or evidence of his rights to a fair trial having been infringed.

 

 

You shoulda stuck with:

 

So do you want to address the matter of others spending their wages as they see fit? 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, jerrymahoney said:

You shoulda stuck with:

 

So do you want to address the matter of others spending their wages as they see fit? 

Feel free to counter the argument I made.

[Yellowtail]

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

‘Mechanics of the case’?

 

The divorce court judge will examine if Willis has an argument to negate the subpoena that calls for her testimony, Willis has made compelling arguments to court in her filing.

 

The criminal court judge will examine if the allegations have any legal bearing on the criminal case and if they present evidence of the defendant’s rights having been infringed. The accuser has made a very weak argument with zero grounds or evidence of his rights to a fair trial having been infringed.

 

 

Do you have anything that supports your ridiculous claims? 

[jerrymahoney]

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Feel free to counter the argument I made.

or not to. Hearing in the big case (not the divorce case)is FEB 15.

 

And Ms. Willis's response to the Roman Motion is due FEB 2.

Edited January 23 by jerrymahoney

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Do you have anything that supports your ridiculous claims? 

In which way are they ridiculous?

 

 

[Yellowtail]

Just now, jerrymahoney said:

or not to. Hearing in the big case is FEB 15.

Hopefully that does not interfere with whatever extravagant Valentine's Day plans the prosecution has...

[Yellowtail]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

In which way are they ridiculous?

 

 

In the way that they are unsupported. Links please. 

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

or not to. Hearing in the big case (not the divorce case)is FEB 15.

 

And Ms. Willis's response to the Roman Motion is due FEB 2.

You are overlooking a detail in Willis’ filing in the divorce case.

 

Her legal team have laid out the basis of criminal conspiracy on the part of the divorcing couple.

 

I look forward to her filing on Feb 2, I expect to hear more of this ‘criminal conspiracy’, you should too.

[Yellowtail]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You are overlooking a detail in Willis’ filing in the divorce case.

 

Her legal team have laid out the basis of criminal conspiracy on the part of the divorcing couple.

 

I look forward to her filing on Feb 2, I expect to hear more of this ‘criminal conspiracy’, you should too.

So, her boyfriend is conspiring against her? 

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

In the way that they are unsupported. Links please. 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/fani-willis-accuses-a-special-prosecutors-estranged-wife-of-interfering-with-trump-election-case

[Yellowtail]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/fani-willis-accuses-a-special-prosecutors-estranged-wife-of-interfering-with-trump-election-case

That does not support your claim. Try again. 

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

That does not support your claim. Try again. 

It provides back up to my statement regarding Willis’ filing.

 

Do keep up.

[Yellowtail]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It provides back up to my statement regarding Willis’ filing.

 

Do keep up.

Where? It does not. 

[nauseus]

19 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It provides back up to my statement regarding Willis’ filing.

 

Do keep up.

 

Filing or fling?

[jerrymahoney]

These are part of the comments from Mrs. Jocelyn Wade's lawyer as to  why she wanted to depose DA Willis:

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

These are part of the comments from Mrs. Jocelyn Wade's lawyer as to  why she wanted to depose DA Willis:

Well that clears up who’s money it was that was being spent.

[impulse]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Well that clears up who’s money it was that was being spent.

 

So that means she's guilty of conflict of interest and he's stealing his ex wife's money.

 

What a team...

 

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

So that means she's guilty of conflict of interest and he's stealing his ex wife's money.

 

What a team...

 

Non sequitur.

 

 

[jerrymahoney]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Non sequitur.

 

 

Or maybe quid pro quo.

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Or maybe quid pro quo.

Maybe, maybe not.

Eitherway, doesn’t get Trump off the hook.

 

[jerrymahoney]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Maybe, maybe not.

Eitherway, doesn’t get Trump off the hook.

 

What trump gets out of it is delay especially if there is mandate for a change in the prosecution team.

[impulse]

2 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

What trump gets out of it is delay especially if there is mandate for a change in the prosecution team.

 

More than that...  All the Trumpers who were coerced into pleading guilty and testifying in return for leniency, may not have to testify.  Immediately after the judge rules the guy can't get a fair trial with her at the helm, their lawyers will be filing appeals.  Then, the lawsuits will start.

 

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, impulse said:

 

More than that...  All the Trumpers who were coerced into pleading guilty and testifying in return for leniency, may not have to testify.  Immediately after the judge rules the guy can't get a fair trial with her at the helm, their lawyers will be filing appeals.  Then, the lawsuits will start.

 

 

What she has done is neither illegal nor a conflict of interest. Any disciplinary action against her will not affect the trial other than a short delay at best.

[dhupverg]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

What she has done is neither illegal nor a conflict of interest. Any disciplinary action against her will not affect the trial other than a short delay at best.

Hiring a guy you are blowing may not be illegal, but certainly unethical.  

[ozimoron]

5 minutes ago, dhupverg said:

Hiring a guy you are blowing may not be illegal, but certainly unethical.  

 

Sure, but my point is just don't think this is a godsend for Trump unless what I've been reading is  wildly wrong.

[Purdey]

I had assumed that in America, like many other places, that if a judge were recused, fired or set aside, they would simply get another judge? Presumably, all documents would be handed in to the new judge and the case would continue based on facts and law. What bearing would it have on the Trump case except timing?

[jerrymahoney]

51 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

What she has done is neither illegal nor a conflict of interest. Any disciplinary action against her will not affect the trial other than a short delay at best.

Fulton official grills DA Fani Willis over alleged relationship
Commissioner Bob Ellis is asking Willis questions over her relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade, who assisted in her Donald Trump investigation.

Published: Jan. 22, 2024 at 10:11 PM GMT+7|Updated: 15 hours ago
ATLANTA, Ga. (Atlanta News First) - A Fulton County commissioner has become the latest public official to demand information from embattled District Attorney Fani Willis about her relationship to the special prosecutor she hired to help investigate former President Donald Trump.

 

On Friday, Commissioner Bob Ellis sent a letter to Willis over allegations she has a personal relationship with Nathan Wade, who has been paid almost $1 million in taxpayer funds for his services in Willis’ investigation of the nation’s 45th president. Newly released bank statements show Willis and Wade took vacations together, and Wade is alleged to have used part of his salary from the district attorney’s office to travel with Willis.

 

“As the chair of the Fulton County audit committee, I must reasonably inquire about allegations that contained in recent court filing asserting that you misused County funds and accepted valuable gifts and personal benefits from a contractor/recipient of County funds,” Ellis wrote.

 

“These allegations involve your decision to appoint Nathan Wade as a special prosecutor in the matter in which former President Trump is a co-defendant,” the letter said. “Mr. Wade is alleged to (1) lack relevant prosecutorial experience in a case of this type and complexity, (2) have paid for your portion of multiple instances of joint leisure travel, and (3) be in a romantic relationship with you that was not disclosed to the court or to the parties in this case.”

 

https://www.atlantanewsfirst.com/2024/01/22/fulton-official-grills-da-fani-willis-over-alleged-relationship/

 

Edited January 23 by jerrymahoney