The decision regarding the fate of the high-profile election interference case in Georgia, involving former President Trump, now rests in the hands of a state judge following the conclusion of a final hearing. Judge Scott McAfee presided over arguments presented during a three-day hearing to determine whether Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade should be disqualified from the case due to their past romantic relationship.

 

The outcome of McAfee's decision hinges on the standard he applies to assess the alleged conflict of interest. Legal experts suggest that if the standard is based on proving an actual conflict, the defense faces an uphill battle, as there is insufficient evidence to support such a claim. However, if the standard is based on the appearance of a conflict or impropriety, the defense's argument may hold more weight.

 

The origins of the case's diversion can be traced back to a motion filed by defendant Michael Roman, a Trump campaign operative, who alleged that Willis financially benefited from her relationship with Wade through extravagant vacations funded by Wade. Despite Willis and Wade confirming their past romantic involvement, discrepancies emerged regarding the timeline of their relationship, with testimony from associates contradicting their accounts.

 

Witness testimony and evidence presented during the hearings have called into question the credibility of the defense's motion, with some characterizing it as based on gossip rather than substantive proof. Fulton County prosecutors argued that the defense failed to demonstrate an actual conflict of interest between Willis and Wade, pointing to the division of travel expenses between the two.

 

McAfee's decision may have significant implications for the prosecution's case. If he chooses to disqualify the district attorney's office, it could lead to further delays and uncertainty, as the case would be handed over to another prosecutor appointed by the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council of Georgia. However, if McAfee opts not to disqualify the office, the defense could pursue discretionary review by the appellate court, though such appeals are rare.

 

Regardless of the outcome, the legal proceedings surrounding the case are likely to face delays, compounded by other legal matters involving Trump in different jurisdictions. The proposed trial date of August 5 may be ambitious given the unresolved motions and potential appeals, leading to speculation that the case may not proceed to trial before the upcoming election.

 

In conclusion, the decision regarding the disqualification of the district attorney's office in the Georgia election interference case holds significant implications for the prosecution's future. As legal proceedings continue, the case remains embroiled in uncertainty, with potential delays and appeals further complicating its resolution.

 

04.03.24

Source

 

Keep Fani Willis in, send tRump to jail.

It'll be the best thing for the USA, let alone the world....

40 minutes ago, Social Media said:

The outcome of McAfee's decision hinges on the standard he applies to assess the alleged conflict of interest. Legal experts suggest that if the standard is based on proving an actual conflict, the defense faces an uphill battle, as there is insufficient evidence to support such a claim. However, if the standard is based on the appearance of a conflict or impropriety, the defense's argument may hold more weight.

From the OP Source:

 

McAfee pushed back on the state’s contention that an actual conflict must be proven, indicating the judge may be looking at a broader method to examine the evidence for disqualifying Willis and her office.  

 

“There are a number of these cases that seem to exclusively rely on the appearance of impropriety,” the judge said.  

 

“I would submit to the court that is not the standard,” Abbate replied, after some back and forth. 

1 hour ago, jerrymahoney said:

From the OP Source:

 

McAfee pushed back on the state’s contention that an actual conflict must be proven, indicating the judge may be looking at a broader method to examine the evidence for disqualifying Willis and her office.  

 

“There are a number of these cases that seem to exclusively rely on the appearance of impropriety,” the judge said.  

 

“I would submit to the court that is not the standard,” Abbate replied, after some back and forth. 

Great.

 

Rob a bank. If you are arrested, find someone to invent dirt on the prosecutor, and hope a judge removes the prosecutor.

 

Shampoo rinse repeat until the case is dismissed.

25 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Great.

 

Rob a bank. If you are arrested, find someone to invent dirt on the prosecutor, and hope a judge removes the prosecutor.

 

Shampoo rinse repeat until the case is dismissed.

Regardless of the outcome, this is what the Brits call in football an "own goal".

Throw the book at her. She was so clearly lying under questioning it was ridiculous. Her indignant attitude, obfuscation, diversionary tactics were quite a sight to behold. She has no business being in a position of power. A complete charlatan. 

So trump try’s to steal the presidency try’s to and fails at pulling off a coup directed his misguided rubes to ransack the peoples house ……but that’s ok because mrs Willis slept with one of her co workers?Really…….let’s get trump tried and hopefully convicted so the Nation can move on from this ugly nightmare 

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

Throw the book at her. She was so clearly lying under questioning it was ridiculous. Her indignant attitude, obfuscation, diversionary tactics were quite a sight to behold. She has no business being in a position of power. A complete charlatan. 

If she was lying under oath the charge of perjury would apply.

 

Note to those struggling to keep up, there is no charge of perjury.

4 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

From the OP Source:

 

McAfee pushed back on the state’s contention that an actual conflict must be proven, indicating the judge may be looking at a broader method to examine the evidence for disqualifying Willis and her office.  

 

“There are a number of these cases that seem to exclusively rely on the appearance of impropriety,” the judge said.  

 

“I would submit to the court that is not the standard,” Abbate replied, after some back and forth. 

The ‘we can’t prove you did anything wrong but there’s something we can’t put a finger on that we don’t like’ attack.

 

 

Attorneys for Trump, Fani Willis spar at final hearing over removing district attorney from Trump Georgia case
 

Updated on: March 1, 2024 / 5:04 PM EST / CBS News

 

No evidence was produced during the earlier evidentiary hearings that showed the defendants' constitutional rights were affected by Wade and Willis' relationship, Abbate said. He reiterated that their romantic relationship began in March 2022, and said Willis repaid Wade for her share of their travel and trips.

 

McAfee, though, said it is no longer "speculation and conjecture" that there was a personal relationship between the prosecutors, and that money changed hands. "Where the ledger stands" may still be an open question, the judge said.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fani-willis-trump-georgia-case-hearing-fulton-county-today/#:~:text=No evidence was,the judge said.

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

If she was lying under oath the charge of perjury would apply.

 

Note to those struggling to keep up, there is no charge of perjury.

 

The key word you're missing there is "yet".

 

9 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

From the OP Source:

 

McAfee pushed back on the state’s contention that an actual conflict must be proven, indicating the judge may be looking at a broader method to examine the evidence for disqualifying Willis and her office.  

 

“There are a number of these cases that seem to exclusively rely on the appearance of impropriety,” the judge said.  

 

“I would submit to the court that is not the standard,” Abbate replied, after some back and forth. 

So the argument is that the appearance of a conflict of interest is enough to kick Fani Willis off the case, but a President and his appointees giving the appearance of a conflict of interest (or more than just appearance) is not enough to throw them out?

 

I'm all in favor of making both conflict of interest and the appearance of a conflict of interest grounds for termination, but the rule should be applied to all levels of government, including elected officials and their appointees. 

 

BTW:  A President pressuring state government officials to change an election result certainly gives the appearance of a conflict of interest.

43 minutes ago, heybruce said:

So the argument is that the appearance of a conflict of interest is enough to kick Fani Willis off the case, but a President and his appointees giving the appearance of a conflict of interest (or more than just appearance) is not enough to throw them out?

 

I'm all in favor of making both conflict of interest and the appearance of a conflict of interest grounds for termination, but the rule should be applied to all levels of government, including elected officials and their appointees. 

 

BTW:  A President pressuring state government officials to change an election result certainly gives the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Fani Willis is the Prosecutor, not the Defendant.

 

And as Judge McAfee noted, there is prior case law involving Prosecutorial conduct 

Edited March 4, 20242 yr by jerrymahoney

On 3/4/2024 at 9:41 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

The ‘we can’t prove you did anything wrong but there’s something we can’t put a finger on that we don’t like’ attack.

 

 

Yes, let's not pull our punches shall we, that "something we can’t put a finger on that we don’t like" is that she is an uppety black woman!

1 hour ago, herfiehandbag said:

Yes, let's not pull our punches shall we, that "something we can’t put a finger on that we don’t like" is that she is an uppety black woman!

Not quite.

 

She’s an intelligent, articulate black woman in a position of power holding a white man to account.

 

casting assertive black people as ‘uppity’, loud or aggressive is all part of the same racism.

 

https://hbr.org/2022/01/the-angry-black-woman-stereotype-at-work

 

 

Edited March 5, 20242 yr by Chomper Higgot

I was lampooning the bigotry which drives MAGA Republican hatred of both Ms Willis and Ms James ( New York AG) rather than lampooning either of those individuals.

 

Fairly obvious I would have thought!

Edited March 5, 20242 yr by herfiehandbag

A post with a video from an unapproved social media source contravening our Community Standards has been removed.  Please remember social media cannot be used unless it is from a credible news media source or a government agency.

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Not quite.

 

She’s an intelligent, articulate black woman in a position of power holding a white man to account.

 

casting assertive black people as ‘uppity’, loud or aggressive is all part of the same racism.

 

https://hbr.org/2022/01/the-angry-black-woman-stereotype-at-work

 

 

 

Loud or Aggressive is fine, as long as they are loud and aggressive. In this case I'd say it's fairly accurate for Fani Willis. 

 

I'd agree on the use of the word uppity, it's has racial connotations, akin to Biden referring to LL Cool J (as well as other black men) as "Boy".

 

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/watch-joe-biden-forgets-popular-rappers-name-and-calls-him-boy-trolled-4419777

 

Edited March 5, 20242 yr by JonnyF

Meanwhile, the Georgia state Senate committee will start taking testimony tomorrow from their first subpoenaed witness in their investigation of the DA.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/26/politics/fani-willis-nathan-wade-georgia-state-senate-investigation/index.html

 

Georgia defense attorney subpoenaed to appear before state committee investigating Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/04/politics/georgia-defense-attorney-fani-willis-state-committee

 

Cowsert said the panel already has heard from “whistleblowers” but did not elaborate on what information they provided. He said the committee intends to dig into any credible allegations, no matter how long the investigation takes.

 

I've got my popcorn out.

 

Regarding the trial judge, my heart goes out to him since he's up for re-election and dismissing Willis, Wade (and her entire office, apparently) will probably torpedo his re-election.

 

 

14 minutes ago, impulse said:

Meanwhile, the Georgia state Senate committee will start taking testimony tomorrow from their first subpoenaed witness in their investigation of the DA.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/26/politics/fani-willis-nathan-wade-georgia-state-senate-investigation/index.html

 

Georgia defense attorney subpoenaed to appear before state committee investigating Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/04/politics/georgia-defense-attorney-fani-willis-state-committee

 

Cowsert said the panel already has heard from “whistleblowers” but did not elaborate on what information they provided. He said the committee intends to dig into any credible allegations, no matter how long the investigation takes.

 

I've got my popcorn out.

 

Regarding the trial judge, my heart goes out to him since he's up for re-election and dismissing Willis, Wade (and her entire office, apparently) will probably torpedo his re-election.

 

 

The same type of whistle-blower as Comer's WBs?

On 3/4/2024 at 2:00 PM, impulse said:

 

The key word you're missing there is "yet".

 

Yet millions of gullible Americans, and even people on this website really believe Trump would be a better president than President Biden, including the gop members of the senate and the house.

 

That is the desperation level that the gop has reached. A new lower level of belief and desperation in the swamp.

 

They actually want a convicted criminal to become the potus.

8 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Yet millions of gullible Americans, and even people on this website really believe Trump would be a better president than President Biden, including the gop members of the senate and the house.

Remind me...  Under whose watch did Hamas attack?  Under whose watch did Putin attack?  Under whose watch did 10 million (+/-) illegals get let in?  Under whose watch did 13 service members get killed in Afghanistan?  Under whose watch did inflation spike?  

 

Yes.  President Trump did a better job, in spite of the mean tweets.  And the world was a safer place.

 

3 hours ago, impulse said:

Remind me...  Under whose watch did Hamas attack?  Under whose watch did Putin attack?  Under whose watch did 10 million (+/-) illegals get let in?  Under whose watch did 13 service members get killed in Afghanistan?  Under whose watch did inflation spike?  

 

Yes.  President Trump did a better job, in spite of the mean tweets.  And the world was a safer place.

 

You still believe that a convicted criminal is better than an honest man. I feel sad for you.

 

I won't even bother to answer your posts any more.

17 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Loud or Aggressive is fine, as long as they are loud and aggressive. In this case I'd say it's fairly accurate for Fani Willis. 

 

I'd agree on the use of the word uppity, it's has racial connotations, akin to Biden referring to LL Cool J (as well as other black men) as "Boy".

 

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/watch-joe-biden-forgets-popular-rappers-name-and-calls-him-boy-trolled-4419777

 

You so effortlessly slide into whataboutary, it’s as if you have long practice in the habit.

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You so effortlessly slide into whataboutary, it’s as if you have long practice in the habit.

 

Just as you so effortlessly slide into race baiting, as if you have lost the argument. 

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

Just as you so effortlessly slide into race baiting, as if you have lost the argument. 

You haven’t presented any on topic argument.

 

 

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You haven’t presented any on topic argument.

 

 

 

It appears you can read, but you cannot comprehend. 

12 hours ago, billd766 said:

You still believe that a convicted criminal is better than an honest man. I feel sad for you.

 

I won't even bother to answer your posts any more.

 

When did Corn Pop become an honest man?

 

Google "Joe Biden's Lies"  But don't bother responding...

 

I can't believe anyone thinks the US (or the world) is better off with 2 new regional wars and the threat of WW3 and nuclear annihilation, than we all were with the occasional mean tweet.

 

But Joe's in good company.  It's not the illicit affair that's going to sink Fani Willis.  It's the lying under oath, the failure to disclose gifts from contractors as required by GA law, and using federal funds for unapproved projects.  That's from one of the whistleblowers...  Who was ushered out the door when Ms Willis didn't like being told what she wasn't allowed to do with earmarked funds.  It's gonna get good.  And liberal heads are soon to explode.

 

Edited March 6, 20242 yr by impulse

16 hours ago, impulse said:

Remind me...  Under whose watch did Hamas attack?  Under whose watch did Putin attack? 

That you really believe these attacks were anything at all to do Joe Biden speaks to the insanity the prevails in the supporters of the compulsive liar and convicted criminal, trump.

"And how much does Ms. Willis make?" Jones asked.

 

"Two hundred and something thousand a year," Merchant said.

"So your argument is that a person who makes $200,000 a year is actually setting up prosecutions to go on a trip that costs $3,500," Jones observed. "That's your argument?"