Popular Post ozimoron Posted March 6 Popular Post Share Posted March 6 1 hour ago, Danderman123 said: "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?" touche. A bit hard to come back from that. 🙂 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerrymahoney Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 Merchant said the $17,000 worth of trips was all she could prove was spent, but that the real issue was that Willis received gifts that cost more than $100 and that she did not properly disclose them. “What we’ve got is we’ve got these financial disclosures where they’re not being truthful, Ms. Willis is lying under oath — which is the same thing my client is charged conspiring to do, lying under oath — about receiving a benefit over $100,” she said. “(Then) you’ve got this concerted effort ... to hide this information from the public. I think that it is very reasonable for a court to think that that is a conflict of interest.” https://www.ajc.com/politics/senate-committee-hears-testimony-on-da-willis/DAGWGGXRX5BGNBIK5IFZRHJVJE/ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Danderman123 Posted March 6 Popular Post Share Posted March 6 1 hour ago, jerrymahoney said: Merchant said the $17,000 worth of trips was all she could prove was spent, but that the real issue was that Willis received gifts that cost more than $100 and that she did not properly disclose them. “What we’ve got is we’ve got these financial disclosures where they’re not being truthful, Ms. Willis is lying under oath — which is the same thing my client is charged conspiring to do, lying under oath — about receiving a benefit over $100,” she said. “(Then) you’ve got this concerted effort ... to hide this information from the public. I think that it is very reasonable for a court to think that that is a conflict of interest.” https://www.ajc.com/politics/senate-committee-hears-testimony-on-da-willis/DAGWGGXRX5BGNBIK5IFZRHJVJE/ Ms. Willis' defense is that she paid her half in cash, as was her practice. The charges are pretty weak tea. 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerrymahoney Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 (edited) 33 minutes ago, Danderman123 said: Ms. Willis' defense is that she paid her half in cash, as was her practice. The charges are pretty weak tea. With zero records from Ms. Willis or Mr. Wade that she did so. As noted earlier this topic: (Judge) 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/ Edited March 6 by jerrymahoney 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post JonnyF Posted March 7 Popular Post Share Posted March 7 Not sure why this is taking so long. A 3 year old with chocolate smothered around his face and an empty cookie jar in his hand swearing blind he hadn't eaten anything would be more convincing than this woman's testimony. Maybe they are worried that a guilty verdict and subsequent dismissal would affect their diversity quota? 1 4 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chomper Higgot Posted March 7 Share Posted March 7 4 hours ago, jerrymahoney said: Merchant said the $17,000 worth of trips was all she could prove was spent, but that the real issue was that Willis received gifts that cost more than $100 and that she did not properly disclose them. “What we’ve got is we’ve got these financial disclosures where they’re not being truthful, Ms. Willis is lying under oath — which is the same thing my client is charged conspiring to do, lying under oath — about receiving a benefit over $100,” she said. “(Then) you’ve got this concerted effort ... to hide this information from the public. I think that it is very reasonable for a court to think that that is a conflict of interest.” https://www.ajc.com/politics/senate-committee-hears-testimony-on-da-willis/DAGWGGXRX5BGNBIK5IFZRHJVJE/ Willis did not have to prove herself innocent. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerrymahoney Posted March 7 Share Posted March 7 At a hearing preceding testimony, McAfee noted that under the law, "disqualification can occur if evidence is produced demonstrating an actual conflict or the appearance of one." He said he wanted testimony to explore "whether a relationship existed, whether that relationship was romantic or non-romantic in nature, when it formed and whether it continues." https://www.gpb.org/news/2024/03/01/lawyers-press-judge-disqualify-fani-willis-over-romantic-relationship-threatens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted March 7 Share Posted March 7 Fulton County ethics board drops Fani Willis complaints from hearing A Fulton County ethics watchdog slated to hear complaints against District Attorney Fani Willis (D) on Thursday will no longer do so, according to an updated meeting agenda. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerrymahoney Posted March 7 Share Posted March 7 1 hour ago, Danderman123 said: Fulton County ethics board drops Fani Willis complaints from hearing A Fulton County ethics watchdog slated to hear complaints against District Attorney Fani Willis (D) on Thursday will no longer do so, according to an updated meeting agenda. Per the link above: The Fulton County Board of Ethics was expected to hear two complaints against Willis after her romance with a special prosecutor on the election interference case involving former President Trump raised concerns of a conflict of interest. The board determined it does not have jurisdiction over Willis, who is a state constitutional officer in her role, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerrymahoney Posted March 7 Share Posted March 7 (edited) 1 hour ago, Danderman123 said: Fulton County ethics board drops Fani Willis complaints from hearing A Fulton County ethics watchdog slated to hear complaints against District Attorney Fani Willis (D) on Thursday will no longer do so, according to an updated meeting agenda. Per the link above: The Fulton County Board of Ethics was expected to hear two complaints against Willis after her romance with a special prosecutor on the election interference case involving former President Trump raised concerns of a conflict of interest. The board determined it does not have jurisdiction over Willis, who is a state constitutional officer in her role, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported. From the AJC report referenced above: The Fulton County Board of Ethics has determined it does not have jurisdiction to hear two complaints against District Attorney Fani Willis — a finding that undermines defense attorneys’ contention that the DA violated county ethics rules in the election interference case. But when the meeting convened, Chairman Daraka Satcher announced the board did not have jurisdiction over the complaints because Willis is a state constitutional officer, not a county official subject to the ethics code. Instead, Satcher said the Georgia State Ethics Commission is the proper venue for the complaints - a contention that is also in dispute. “The Fulton County Code of Ethics, our code of ethics, only applies to county officers and employees,” Satcher said, reading a prepared statement. https://www.ajc.com/politics/fulton-board-says-it-doesnt-have-jurisdiction-over-willis-ethics-complaints/33VEAHPKTVCRRPCVP2NFNYCRSE/ Edited March 7 by jerrymahoney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerrymahoney Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 (edited) (Judge McAfee) gave an interview to a local radio host on Thursday night, assuring listeners that the emergence of a political opponent would not influence his decision on whether to disqualify Ms. Willis, which he said he had already made. “I’ve had a rough draft and an outline before I ever heard a rumor that someone wanted to run for this position, so the result is not going to change because of politics,” he said on WSB Atlanta. “I am calling it as best I can in the law, as I understand it.” https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/us/scott-mcafee-willis-trump-georgia-trial.html Edited March 12 by jerrymahoney 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riclag Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 On 3/7/2024 at 8:42 AM, JonnyF said: Not sure why this is taking so long. A 3 year old with chocolate smothered around his face and an empty cookie jar in his hand swearing blind he hadn't eaten anything would be more convincing than this woman's testimony. Maybe they are worried that a guilty verdict and subsequent dismissal would affect their diversity quota? Politics! The judge donated to Willis campaign! https://www.newsweek.com/fani-willis-received-donation-trump-judge-financial-disclosures-show-1872293 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riclag Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 1 minute ago, riclag said: Politics! The judge donated to Willis campaign! https://www.newsweek.com/fani-willis-received-donation-trump-judge-financial-disclosures-show-1872293 I never seen a judge cower like him when she was on the witness stand. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 A reasonable decision. The Fani Willis-Wade relationship looks bad, and one must go. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post tilaceer Posted March 15 Popular Post Share Posted March 15 Goodbye Wade. 1 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 (edited) So, when does the Trump trial start? Note that it was Wade's responsibility to prepare the indictments, many of which were thrown out yesterday. A new prosecutor might be able to revise them sufficiently to be approved by the judge. Edited March 15 by Danderman123 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Danderman123 Posted March 15 Popular Post Share Posted March 15 As always, the Trump fans are waiting for their talking points before posting about this. No independent thought. 1 1 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post LosLobo Posted March 15 Popular Post Share Posted March 15 Gym Jordan will obviously push his threat of charging Fani Willis contempt even harder now for her failing to respond to his subpoena. He doesn't seem to mind the hypocrisy of his own failure to respond to one for Jan 6th Committee hearing. Jordan threatens Fani Willis with contempt over subpoena on federal grants | The Hill 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosLobo Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 (edited) 48 minutes ago, Danderman123 said: So, when does the Trump trial start? Note that it was Wade's responsibility to prepare the indictments, many of which were thrown out yesterday. A new prosecutor might be able to revise them sufficiently to be approved by the judge. A commentator on CNN just said Judge McAfee has already said not likely before election. And the NY 'Hush Money' criminal trial was originally scheduled to start on March 25, 2024. However, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said in a court filing that his office doesn’t oppose a 30-day delay in the start of that trial. This means the new start date for that trial would be around late April 2024. NY district attorney supports 30-day delay in Trump hush money trial (nbcnews.com) Edited March 15 by LosLobo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G_Money Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 Appears you can’t have your cake and eat it too. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judge-rules-fani-willis-must-step-aside-trump-case-fire-special-prosecutor-nathan-wade 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Tug Posted March 15 Popular Post Share Posted March 15 2 hours ago, G_Money said: Appears you can’t have your cake and eat it too. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judge-rules-fani-willis-must-step-aside-trump-case-fire-special-prosecutor-nathan-wade Another words to placate the biggest snowflake crybaby victim on the planet(trump)wade has to go…..so be it.I do find it ironic that a (man) that has an affair with a pornstar as his wife is home taking care of their infant gets his ittiebittie toad stool(emphasis on stool) in a knot over someone else’s morals/sex life its ridiculous….lets get this adhjucated so the powers that be can consider matters of importance not some frauds attempted theft of the presidency/coup!! 1 2 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Danderman123 Posted March 15 Popular Post Share Posted March 15 I would like to see Fani Willis recruit a superstar prosecutor - an Andrew Weissman, Glenn Kirschner, or Eric Holder. 1 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 Nathan Wade resigns after judge says Fani Willis and her office can stay on Trump Georgia 2020 election case if he steps aside I am thinking that the judge sent a message yesterday when he dropped a bunch of the charges due to their being poorly worded; ie Fani Willis needed a better Special Prosecutor. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerrymahoney Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 There was no immediate word on whether any of the defendants would appeal McAfee’s ruling. Trump attorney Steve Sadow said Friday he will continue to “use all legal options available as we continue to fight to end this case, which should never have been brought in the first place.” “While respecting the Court’s decision, we believe that the Court did not afford appropriate significance to the prosecutorial misconduct of Willis and Wade, including the financial benefits, testifying untruthfully about when their personal relationship began, as well as Willis’ extrajudicial MLK ‘church speech,’” he said. (GA Law Professor) Kreis said that because the judge ruled there’s no factual basis for an actual conflict of interest, that means the issue is likely off the table for an appeals court to consider, which is helpful for the DA should defense counsel appeal. https://www.ajc.com/politics/judge-rules-fulton-da-willis-can-stay-if-wade-steps-aside/3BDOOBKOEBHJBM3X2UOU7QKMXY/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post G_Money Posted March 16 Popular Post Share Posted March 16 10 hours ago, Tug said: Another words to placate the biggest snowflake crybaby victim on the planet(trump)wade has to go…..so be it.I do find it ironic that a (man) that has an affair with a pornstar as his wife is home taking care of their infant gets his ittiebittie toad stool(emphasis on stool) in a knot over someone else’s morals/sex life its ridiculous….lets get this adhjucated so the powers that be can consider matters of importance not some frauds attempted theft of the presidency/coup!! Feel better now? So lying on camera looking directly into the face the American people and saying “I did not have sexual relations with that woman “ is ok? JFK’s affair ok? Powerful men have Mia Noi’s. Get over it. 1 1 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post LosLobo Posted March 16 Popular Post Share Posted March 16 (edited) 10 hours ago, Danderman123 said: I would like to see Fani Willis recruit a superstar prosecutor - an Andrew Weissman, Glenn Kirschner, or Eric Holder. I would prefer 'Fani Willis to recruit super' Ironman Jack Smith believer of Truth, Justice and the ... (subject to Georgia bar and jurisdiction limitations). He must be twiddling his thumbs with his finger on the trigger, now restrained by Trump's Kryptonite that is the SCOTUS majority who idly play kick-the-can down the road to deny justice for their benefactor and the people. Justice delayed is justice denied! Edited March 16 by LosLobo 1 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chomper Higgot Posted March 16 Share Posted March 16 1 hour ago, G_Money said: Feel better now? So lying on camera looking directly into the face the American people and saying “I did not have sexual relations with that woman “ is ok? JFK’s affair ok? Powerful men have Mia Noi’s. Get over it. It sounds like desperate whataboutary to me 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G_Money Posted March 16 Share Posted March 16 11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said: It sounds like desperate whataboutary to me Facts are facts! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post uncletiger Posted March 16 Popular Post Share Posted March 16 Getting back to the original subject and the recent decision, what the Trump haters don't realize is the precedent this just set for coming trials of Obama, Bush, Clinton, Biden, etc. All of this nonsense Trump is being forced to endure is not going to affect him. Since the charges against Trump are mostly fabricated, in the end he is going to be cleared of them as the appeals get pushed further up the chain. But the precedents being set about the fact that a "biased" prosecutor is not disqualifying will proceed into the real trials of the actual traitors and quislings coming up next year. So everyone cheering about these things right now when it is applied to Trump, are going to be lamenting about them next year as the same precedents are applied to the globalists. 1 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chomper Higgot Posted March 16 Share Posted March 16 18 minutes ago, uncletiger said: Getting back to the original subject and the recent decision, what the Trump haters don't realize is the precedent this just set for coming trials of Obama, Bush, Clinton, Biden, etc. All of this nonsense Trump is being forced to endure is not going to affect him. Since the charges against Trump are mostly fabricated, in the end he is going to be cleared of them as the appeals get pushed further up the chain. But the precedents being set about the fact that a "biased" prosecutor is not disqualifying will proceed into the real trials of the actual traitors and quislings coming up next year. So everyone cheering about these things right now when it is applied to Trump, are going to be lamenting about them next year as the same precedents are applied to the globalists. All you need now is evidence of crimes against all these ‘globalists’. And if crimes have been committed, then what precisely is wrong with investigating and prosecuting those crimes? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now