╌>

Nathan Wade resigns after judge says Fani Willis and her office can stay on Trump Georgia 2020 election case if he steps aside - CBS News

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  jbb  •  one month ago  •  77 comments

By:   Melissa Quinn, Jared Eggleston (CBSPolitics)

Nathan Wade resigns after judge says Fani Willis and her office can stay on Trump Georgia 2020 election case if he steps aside - CBS News
Judge in Georgia Trump election case says while he couldn't "conclusively establish" when Willis' relationship with prosecutor turned romantic, "an odor of mendacity remains."

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


By Melissa Quinn, Jared Eggleston

Updated on: March 15, 2024 / 3:38 PM EDT / CBS News

Fani Willis can stay on Trump election case Fani Willis can stay on Trump election case if Nathan Wade steps down18:04

Atlanta — Nathan Wade, a special prosecutor working with the Fulton County District Attorney's Office, resigned his post after a judge ruled Friday that District Attorney Fani Willis and her office may remain on the 2020 election case involving former President Donald Trump and his allies if Wade stepped aside.

Wade's resignation as special prosecutor came hours after Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee laid out two options that would allow for the continued prosecution of the racketeering case against Trump and his co-defendants stemming from an alleged scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Georgia.

"The district attorney may choose to step aside, along with the whole of her office, and refer the prosecution to the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council for reassignment," McAfee wrote in his 23-page decision. "Alternatively, [special assistant district attorney] Wade can withdraw, allowing the district attorney, the defendants, and the public to move forward without his presence or remuneration distracting from and potentially compromising the merits of this case."

Wade said in a letter to Willis, with whom he had a romantic relationship with while serving as special prosecutor, that he was stepping down "in the interest of democracy, in dedication to the American public, and to move this case forward as quickly as possible." The district attorney accepted his resignation and in her own letter to Wade, praised him for his "professionalism and dignity."

Willis lauded Wade's "patriotism, courage and dedication to justice" in the face of threats against himself and his family, "as well as unjustified attacks in the media and in court on your reputation as a lawyer."

McAfee's decision was in response to a request to disqualify Willis and Wade by Michael Roman, a longtime GOP operative and one of Trump's co-defendants, who said there was a romantic relationship between the pair and that Willis had improperly benefited from that relationship. Although Willis acknowledged she and Wade were romantically involved, she fiercely disputed the claims that the relationship began before she hired him in November 2021. The allegations set off days of fiery testimony which included Willis taking the stand in her own defense.

Though McAfee's decision allowed Willis and her office to continue prosecuting the case — albeit if Wade withdrew from the team — he chided Willis for what he said is a "tremendous lapse in judgment" and criticized the "unprofessional manner" of her testimony during an evidentiary hearing last month.

Still, he said Georgia law "does not permit the finding of an actual conflict for simply making bad choices — even repeatedly — and it is the trial court's duty to confine itself to the relevant issues and applicable law properly brought before it." McAfee said other sources of authority, such as the State Bar of Georgia, the state Legislature, or Fulton County voters, "may offer feedback on any unanswered questions that linger."

Trump attorney's response


Steve Sadow, Trump's attorney, pledged in a statement to use "all legal options available" to dismiss the case.

"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,' where she played the race card and falsely accused the defendants and their counsel of racism," he said in response to McAfee's decision.

Roman's attorney, Ashleigh Merchant, said she doesn't believe that the remedy suggested by McAfee is "adequate" in response to Willis' conduct, but added that she looks forward to the district attorney's response to his demands.

"While we believe the court should have disqualified Willis' office entirely, this opinion is a vindication that everything put forth by the defense was true, accurate and relevant to the issues surrounding our clients right to a fair trial," Merchant said in a statement. "The judge clearly agreed with the defense that the actions of Willis are a result of her poor judgment and that there is a risk to the future of this case if she doesn't quickly work to cure her conflict."

McAfee ruling rebukes Willlis: "An odor of mendacity remains"


The judge found that evidence presented during earlier proceedings showed that "the district attorney's prosecution is encumbered by an appearance of impropriety," and said that even if Willis' relationship with Wade began after his hiring in November 2021, she continued to supervise and pay him while maintaining a romantic relationship.

Willis, the judge said, also allowed the "regular exchange of money between them" without any means of verifying that they split the costs of getaways they took together.

"This lack of a confirmed financial split creates the possibility and appearance that the district attorney benefited — albeit non-materially — from a contract whose award lay solely within her purview and policing," McAfee wrote.

He said that if the case were allowed to move forward unchanged, concerns of wrongdoing raised by Trump and his co-defendants would persist.

McAfee also rebuked Wade for what he said was a "patently unpersuasive explanation for the inaccurate interrogatories" the special prosecutor submitted in divorce proceedings, which the judge said indicated a willingness to "wrongly conceal" his relationship with Willis.

"An outsider could reasonably think that the district attorney is not exercising her independent professional judgment totally free of any compromising influences. As long as Wade remains on the case, this unnecessary perception will persist," McAfee wrote.

The judge found that while he was not able to "conclusively establish" when Wade and Willis' relationship turned romantic, "an odor of mendacity remains." Defense lawyers argued their relationship predated Wade's hiring, and the timeline emerged as a key issue during evidentiary hearings last month.

"Reasonable questions about whether the District Attorney and her hand-selected lead SADA testified untruthfully about the timing of their relationship further underpin the finding of an appearance of impropriety and the need to make proportional efforts to cure it," McAfee wrote.

McAfee finds Trump, co-defendants did not prove conflict of interest


Still, the judge concluded that Trump and his co-defendants fell short of meeting the burden of proving Willis had an actual conflict of interest in the case through her relationship with Wade. He also denied Trump's request to disqualify the district attorney from the prosecution because of "forensic misconduct," based on a speech Willis gave at Atlanta's oldest Black church after her relationship with Wade was brought into public view.

While McAfee said the effect of Willis' speech was to "cast racial aspersions at" Roman's decision to request she be removed, he could not find that her remarks crossed a line to deny Trump and his co-defendants a fair trial or require her disqualification.

Still, the judge said her speech was "legally improper" and "creates dangerous waters for the District Attorney to wade further into. McAfee suggested it may be time for a gag order preventing prosecutors from speaking publicly about the case.

The bid to disqualify Willis and Wade


McAfee's order came just after he tossed out six counts included in the indictment returned in August, including three against Trump. He left the remainder of the charges intact and said Georgia prosecutors can seek a new indictment supplementing the six counts.

The effort to remove Willis and her office from the prosecution arose in January, when Roman filed a motion that claimed the district attorney had a personal relationship with Wade and financially benefited from it.

Roman's attorneys alleged Willis and Wade became romantically involved before his hiring as a special prosecutor to work on the case involving Trump and said the pair took numerous trips together, which Wade paid for using income he received for his work in Fulton County. The defense attorneys argued the relationship created an impermissible conflict of interest and urged McAfee to disqualify Willis and her office from prosecuting the case, and dismiss the charges altogether.

Willis and Wade acknowledged in a court filing last month that they had a romantic relationship, but said it began in early 2022, months after Wade's appointment.

Roman's bid to kick Willis off the case was swiftly joined by Trump and seven others, and the allegations kicked off a series of extraordinary evidentiary hearings that featured testimony from both Willis and Wade.

During her roughly two hours on the witness stand, Willis forcefully defended herself from accusations she acted improperly and instead accused defense attorneys of intruding into her personal life and deflecting from the charges against their clients.

"You're confused. You think I'm on trial. These people are on trial for trying to steal an election in 2020," Willis told Merchant, Roman's lawyer, during her Feb. 15 testimony. "I'm not on trial, no matter how hard you try to put me on trial."

The district attorney also provided intimate details about her relationship with Wade — which she said ended last August — and their travels and financial dealings.

The timeline of Willis and Wade's relationship emerged as a key focus of the proceedings, as a former longtime friend of the district attorney's testified that the two prosecutors began dating before Wade received his first contract to work on Trump's case.

Terrence Bradley, Wade's former law partner and divorce attorney who was billed as a "star witness," took the witness stand on three separate occasions and was asked repeatedly about a text message he sent Merchant claiming Willis and Wade's personal relationship began pre-dated Wade's hiring. But Bradley said he was "speculating" about the timing and testified that he had no direct knowledge of when the relationship began.

Willis and Wade, meanwhile, repeatedly stated that while they met for the first time at a judicial conference in 2019, their interactions did not become romantic until early 2022. During the months they dated, the couple took two cruises and visited Aruba, Belize and Napa, California.

Defense attorneys zeroed in on their getaways to argue that Willis had received financial benefits from the relationship, since they said Wade paid for trips, hotel rooms and travel expenses using money he received through his contracts to be special prosecutor in the Trump case.

"If this court allows this kind of behavior to go on and allows D.A.s across the state by its order to engage in these kinds of activities, the entire public confidence in the system will be shot, and the integrity of the system will be undermined," John Merchant, one of Roman's attorneys, said during closing arguments in a March 1 hearing.

But both Willis and Wade stated that they had split the costs associated with their travels, and both also said Willis often reimbursed Wade in cash. Willis testified that her father encouraged her to keep cash on hand to cover several months of expenses, so she often had it available.

The district attorney's father, John Clifford Floyd III, confirmed during his own testimony that he gave his daughter that financial advice and also answered questions about her romantic relationships. Also appearing during the evidentiary hearings was former Georgia Gov. Roy Barnes, who was Willis' first choice for special prosecutor but declined the offer to work on the case.

Adam Abbate, who works in Willis' office, argued earlier this month that there has been "absolutely no evidence that the district attorney has benefited at all" or would benefit in the future from the prosecution of the case against Trump.

  • In:
  • Georgia
  • Fani Willis
  • Fulton County

Melissa Quinn

Melissa Quinn is a politics reporter for CBSNews.com. She has written for outlets including the Washington Examiner, Daily Signal and Alexandria Times. Melissa covers U.S. politics, with a focus on the Supreme Court and federal courts.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1  seeder  JBB    one month ago

Fani Willis CAN STAY on Trump's fraud case...

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JBB @1    one month ago

And lose

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.1.1  seeder  JBB  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1    one month ago

But, Willis won today! So Fani can stay...

Just admit it that you were wrong, again!

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
1.1.2  MrFrost  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1    one month ago

And lose

If only it wasn't on a recorded line... What a shame. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.1.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JBB @1.1.1    one month ago

Nope she lost her boyfriend and the person with the most knowledge of where she was going. Tough shit. She basically has to start over with a new prostituter.....err prosecutor

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.1.4  seeder  JBB  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.3    one month ago

Nope, Willis and Wade had already broke up and another prosecutor, probably one of Wade's assistants, will take over quickly.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
1.1.5  MrFrost  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.3    one month ago
Nope she lost her boyfriend and the person with the most knowledge of where she was going.

Which changes NOTHING about the facts of the case. Also, if you think Willis and Wade were the only two people working on this case, you are sadly mistaken. This is nothing more than a small speed bump. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.1.6  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  MrFrost @1.1.2    one month ago

BFD. He asked someone to investigate and find some votes. NOT "you need to forge 11,000 votes"

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
1.1.7  MrFrost  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.3    one month ago
She basically has to start over with a new prostituter.

What does Boebert have to do with this? 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.1.8  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  MrFrost @1.1.7    one month ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.9  TᵢG  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1    one month ago

Why?   Is it your opinion that the charges are without merit?   That Trump did no wrong?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.1.10  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.9    one month ago

Flimsy at best and they know it if they get an impartial judge and jury

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.1.11  Split Personality  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.10    one month ago
Flimsy at best and they know it if they get an impartial judge and jury

if they get an impartial judge and jury what??

Isn't McAfee the Judge?

Doesn't the rest of the evidence mean anything?

Aren't there like 14 other people accused?  All of which were already investigated and recommended for prosecution.

Grand Juries? They all wasted everyone's time?

Besides the Rathsberger tape which gets a bit testy, "find " me more votes.

other recordings have surfaced with Ronna McDaniels and Trump on a conference call where Trump does the threats to Michigan electors.

He had no business getting this involved.

He lost. He is still lying about it every day.

Enough already, I don't care that the DA is a single woman with a sex life, it has nothing to do with the evidence that Trump himself created.

Get on with the trial and let the chips fall where they may.

I won't lose any sleep over the outcome.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.12  TᵢG  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.10    one month ago

What is your supporting argument that these charges are "flimsy at best" and that the judge is not impartial?

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
1.1.13  Greg Jones  replied to  JBB @1.1.1    one month ago

Yeah, but the stink of taint is bound to stick to her. No reasonable jury would convict with such a compromised case.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
1.1.14  MrFrost  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.13    one month ago
stink of taint is bound to stick to her.

Even if true, what law is that breaking?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.15  Tessylo  replied to  MrFrost @1.1.2    one month ago

jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif They got nothin'!  They never have and they never will.  Sore losers.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.16  Tessylo  replied to  MrFrost @1.1.5    one month ago

It's pathetic, this defense of the indefensible.  

That phone was perfect - for the prosecution.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.17  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.16    one month ago

phone call was perfect

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.18  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.10    one month ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.19  Tessylo  replied to  Split Personality @1.1.11    one month ago

'Enough already, I don't care that the DA is a single woman with a sex life, it has nothing to do with the evidence that the former 'president' himself created.'

jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif

I can't believe some folks still state the justice system is skewed towards Democrats.  

Enough IS enough already.  

There has to be some kind of limit that the former 'president's' 'lawyers' and he are able to stall and delay and dismiss at some point on his being a former 'president' and this fucking ridiculous immunity claim.  JFC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.20  Tessylo  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.12    one month ago

You'll never get an answer to that question.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
1.1.21  Ronin2  replied to  Split Personality @1.1.11    one month ago
if they get an impartial judge and jury what??

There are no impartial TDS driven leftists or Democrats. Especially not in Democrat controlled bastions of stupidity like Fulton County.

Isn't McAfee the Judge?

McAfee is the judge; and served under Willis for a portion of his career as a lawyer. He is also up for reelection. Which explains his fucked up ruling allowing Willis to stay on the case.

Scott F. McAfee, a recently appointed Fulton County Superior Court judge who was once supervised by the district attorney overseeing the case. Judge McAfee, 34, rose quickly in Georgia’s legal world after graduating from law school a decade ago, and one of his first jobs was in the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office. There, he handled early stages of felony cases before being promoted to the complex trial division. The division was led at the time by Fani T. Willis, the prosecutor overseeing the Trump case, according to a former district attorney and another lawyer who worked in the office at the time.

How could Friday’s ruling affect Fulton County Superior Judge Scott McAfee and Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis as they try to hold onto their jobs? Both McAfee and Willis are up for reelection this year. 

Judge McAfee’s ruling to let DA Willis stay on the Georgia election interference case against former President Donald Trump and others could factor heavily in this year’s political campaign.

Tharon Johnson, a Democratic strategist, says McAfee could remain out unscathed from his decision. "I think that Judge McAfee comes out on this clean. Ultimately, I don’t think it hurts his candidacy to be reelected in Fulton County."

His bid to get reelected directly factored into his decision. Party before the law with Democrats.

Doesn't the rest of the evidence mean anything?

Ever heard of tainted evidence? None of the evidence gathered by Willis or Wade should be admissible because both had ulterior for bringing the case and filing the ridiculous charges they did. They were bilking the Georgia tax payers to pay for the affair. That is if they had an impartial judge.

Aren't there like 14 other people accused?  All of which were already investigated and recommended for prosecution.

Haven't you learned yet? Democrats don't want to just take Trump down. They want to take everyone around him down as well. Also, Willis and Wade were involved in gathering evidence against the others as well. In fact it wasn't even the Trump lawyers that brought up Willis and Wade screwing the Georgia tax payers- but another defendant.

One of former president Donald Trump's co-defendants in his   Georgia election interference case   is seeking to dismiss the indictment against him and disqualify Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, alleging that she "engaged in a personal, romantic relationship" with one of the top prosecutors she brought in to work on the case, which allegedly resulted in financial gain for both of them.

In a court filing Monday, former Trump campaign staff member Michael Roman accuses Willis of having potentially committed "an act to defraud the public of honest services" based on her "intentional failure" to disclose to alleged relationship that she allegedly "personally benefitted from."

"Accordingly, the district attorney and the special prosecutor have violated laws regulating the use of public monies, suffer from irreparable conflicts of interest, and have violated their oaths of office under the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct and should be disqualified from prosecuting this matter," the 127-page filing from Roman's attorney, Ashleigh Merchant, said.

The taint from Willis and Wade applies to the evidence they gathered of everyone accused.

Grand Juries? They all wasted everyone's time?

Wouldn't be the first time won't be the last. Maybe Democrats should stop electing criminals to office?

Besides the Rathsberger tape which gets a bit testy, "find " me more votes.

Find is not create- no matter how Democrats and leftists spin it.

other recordings have surfaced with Ronna McDaniels and Trump on a conference call where Trump does the threats to Michigan electors.

Remember Hillary fucking Clinton and the Democrats in 2016 trying to coerce electors into changing their votes from Trump to her?

So where are the charges against Hillary Clinton and cohorts?

He had no business getting this involved.

Neither did Hillary Clinton or Al Gore- yet they both did.

He lost. He is still lying about it every day.

So when are you going to call out Democrats who are still lying about their election loses. Including Hillary Clinton.

Enough already, I don't care that the DA is a single woman with a sex life, it has nothing to do with the evidence that Trump himself created.

We all get it. Democrats/leftists don't give a shit about due process, the law, Constitution, or impartiality. It is proven each and every day.

Get on with the trial and let the chips fall where they may.

Sorry, due process has to play out first. Willis needs to be removed. Possibly the judge as well. I am sure all of the defendants lawyers will be filing requests.

I won't lose any sleep over the outcome.

Sure you won't you aren't one of the defendants. But if the outcome isn't in Democrats/leftists favor expect a near end of the world event to occur.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.1.22  seeder  JBB  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.21    one month ago

original

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
1.1.23  MrFrost  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.21    one month ago
Hillary fucking Clinton

CDS!

 
 
 
fineline
Freshman Silent
1.2  fineline  replied to  JBB @1    one month ago

  That odor of mendacity entered with Trumps defense team .

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.3  devangelical  replied to  JBB @1    one month ago

maga trash aren't done with this one yet. it's a state case that trump can't grant himself a federal pardon ...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2  Vic Eldred    one month ago

Fani is now tainted. She may also not be up to the job.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.1  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    one month ago

she's only tainted in the minds of those that think she should've gotten master's permission first...

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
2.2  MrFrost  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    one month ago
Fani is now tainted.

But guilty as fuck trump is pure as the driven snow, right vic? 

[deleted]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  MrFrost @2.2    one month ago
I swear trump could eat a live human baby on TV

I'm sure you think he did.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
2.2.2  MrFrost  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.1    one month ago

I'm sure you think he did.

Not what I said Vic. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.2.3  Tessylo  replied to  MrFrost @2.2    one month ago

You know they don't hold the former 'president' shitstain to any standards whatsoever.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.3  seeder  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    one month ago

IF Willis was taited today it is With A VICTORY:

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.3.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  JBB @2.3    one month ago

This is the dumbest thing ever written in the English language. For anyone who  thinks a judge publicly ripping a DA's conduct and admitting that a taint of corruption exists while endorsing a criminal investigation into a lawyer's  conduct is a victory for a DA i feel sorry for you. Seriously.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.3.2  seeder  JBB  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.3.1    one month ago

Willis used poor judgement having an affair with another prosecutor in her office, but that is not a disqualification...

Wade resigned, Willis carries on and Trump is going down!

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.3.3  devangelical  replied to  JBB @2.3.2    one month ago

what's really hilarious is that trump's lawyers are complaining about an alleged financial misdeed in georgia, while trump is about to go on trial in NYC for committing fraud by paying off a porn star to keep their affair off the news. no hypocrisy to see there ...

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.4  Snuffy  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    one month ago

It's fairly obvious from the testimony and the judge's ruling that she lied under oath. Will the State Bar have anything to say about this in the future? The Georgia State Senate is also investigating, but that's being run by Republicans so the partisan tilt cannot be dismissed. 

But who really knows what the future holds, both for this case as well as her future career. But IMO this action will be included in the defense and in any possible appeals if needed. Time will tell.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.4.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  Snuffy @2.4    one month ago
It's fairly obvious from the testimony and the judge's ruling that she lied under oath. Will the State Bar have anything to say about this in the future?

That is what angers me the most about our current legal system. I can still remember when technicalities were important. Bill Ayers (radical bomber) walked because of a technicality. Now the rules are ignored whenever it benefits the powerful.

But who really knows what the future holds, both for this case as well as her future career. But IMO this action will be included in the defense and in any possible appeals if needed. Time will tell.

All I know is whatever happens in Fulton County now will benefit Trump.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.4.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  Snuffy @2.4    one month ago
ut IMO this action will be included in the defense and in any possible appeals if needed. Time will tell.

Trump will almost certainly immediately appeal the decision and the state, if it weren't doing this for political reasons would agree. For if they go to trial and Trump is convicted but the Appellate Court makes comes to the very reasonable decision that the taint of misconduct remains as along her office is involved, than Trump would walk.  Prudence would dictate that settling this issue before trial would be the reasonable way to proceed, but Democrats are only interested in headlines.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.4.3  Tessylo  replied to  Snuffy @2.4    one month ago

The former 'president' never lies.

This defense of the indefensible and holding the shitstain to no standards whatsoever is so fucking unbelievable.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.4.4  Snuffy  replied to  Tessylo @2.4.3    one month ago

Do show me where anywhere in that post of mine was any mention of Trump. You cannot so please stop deflecting and actually respond to what is said. Try to raise the level of discussion here instead of constantly deflecting. 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
2.4.5  Right Down the Center  replied to  Snuffy @2.4.4    one month ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.4.6  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.1    one month ago
Now the rules are ignored whenever it benefits the powerful.

The "powerful" have always had advantages over the "common".    Right off the bat, the more money you have the better defense you can buy.   But then there is the influence of the powerful which can cause connected individuals to pull strings on your behalf.  On and on.   This is what happens in all societies historically.

All I know is whatever happens in Fulton County now will benefit Trump.

So which "powerful' individual is getting the benefit?   

Trump has been getting benefits throughout.   He has successfully delayed legal actions left and right.   The SCotUS has recently introduced a blatantly obvious delay by taking and not hearing his immunity case until late April.  There is no way on the planet that the SCotUS is going to agree with Trump's immunity argument yet they took the case anyone. 

Trump has and continues to get benefits from his status as former PotUS, wealthy guy, presumptive nominee with a large political following, and his celebrity status.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
3  MrFrost    one month ago

Why doesn't trump, who claims he is totally innocent, want a speedy trial to prove his innocence before the election?

Because he's fucking guilty, that's why. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
3.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  MrFrost @3    one month ago

No because he has better things to do with his time than facilitate another witch hunt.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
3.1.1  MrFrost  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @3.1    one month ago

No because he has better things to do with his time than facilitate another witch hunt.

Like what? Cheat on his wife? Pay off porn stars? Lie? Cheat? Steal? Fraud? Maybe there is another kids cancer fund he can steal from? Who knows, maybe he could fly to russia and entertain putin with another "rub-n-tug"? He could work on his golf game, grab women by the pussy or ignore his grandkids! I mean he has many thing to do but he is just too fuckin' busy to offer up even one policy idea or do anything and I mean, ANYTHING, to help the American people! 

You're right Jim, trump should just ignore the court case and let the chips fall where they may. I mean, it's a lot like cancer or AIDS, if you ignore it, it will just go away! 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
3.1.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  MrFrost @3.1.1    one month ago

Court case should never have materialized. It's just another "stop Trump at all costs" bullshit narrative. There was no affect on the election. Just bluster by someone who thinks he got cheated. And ignore his grandkids? LMAO the kid's father ignored it.

 
 
 
fineline
Freshman Silent
3.1.3  fineline  replied to  MrFrost @3.1.1    one month ago

Perfect !

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
3.1.4  Gsquared  replied to  MrFrost @3.1.1    one month ago
Like what?

You forgot writing love letters to Kim Jong Un.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @3.1    one month ago

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  MrFrost @3.1.1    one month ago

Yeah - better things to do with his time - yeah, he spends so much time with his family and friends doesn't he?

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  MrFrost @3    one month ago
Why doesn't trump, who claims he is totally innocent, want a speedy trial

He wants a fair trial.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.2.1  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.2    one month ago
He wants a fair trial.

No he clearly does not.   He obviously wants the case to be dismissed.   

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
3.2.2  MrFrost  replied to  TᵢG @3.2.1    one month ago
No he clearly does not. 

Exactly. 

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
3.2.3  MrFrost  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.2    one month ago
He wants a fair trial.

He wants a fair trial just like he wants a fair election, vic. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.2.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.2.1    one month ago
No he clearly does not.

Are you really going to stand there and claim any of this was fair?

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
3.2.5  seeder  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.2    one month ago

original

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.2.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  MrFrost @3.2.3    one month ago
a fair election

Which is the democrats euphemism for sending out millions of ballots to people who haven't even requested them.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
3.2.7  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JBB @3.2.5    one month ago

Ahhh the cursory stupid fucking meme has arrived.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.2.8  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @3.2.5    one month ago

That's all you have.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.2.9  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.2.6    one month ago

maybe filing another 60 lawsuits without any evidence will help...

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
3.2.10  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  devangelical @3.2.9    one month ago

Or how about another 91 indictments with flimsy evidence. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.2.11  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.2.4    one month ago

My comment claims that Trump wants this case to go away and does not want a trial.

If you disagree, make an argument.   

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.2.12  TᵢG  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @3.2.10    one month ago

Wow, how revealing.    

So Trump has done no wrong, eh?   These indictments are all bogus?

Did Trump attempt to violate the CotUS by suborning Pence to table certified votes from the states in the hope that this would force Congress to decide and accept the fake electors he had prepared?

Explain how you come to believe the evidence supporting this allegation is flimsy.   

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
3.2.13  bugsy  replied to  TᵢG @3.2.12    one month ago
So Trump has done no wrong, eh?   These indictments are all bogus?

He said neither of these statements.

He said the charges, as written are flimsy.

[deleted]

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
3.2.14  Split Personality  replied to  bugsy @3.2.13    one month ago
He said the charges, as written are flimsy.

And the judge agreed on 3 of Trump's 41 charges in this case

and three other persons charges.

However the judge also said that the evidence stayed and

the judge also recommended three ways to have all of the dismissed charges "cured"

and reinstated.

Not good for the defendants.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
3.2.15  Greg Jones  replied to  TᵢG @3.2.12    one month ago

None of these charges have been proven and Trump is doing his best to get these trials dismissed or delayed. Which is legal and what a reasonable person would do.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.2.16  TᵢG  replied to  Greg Jones @3.2.15    one month ago

Yeah, Greg, we are all aware that the trial has not concluded.   

That does not support the claim that the evidence is flimsy.  

Was it wrong for Trump to suborn Pence to table the certified votes of the states?

Pretend Trump was a D PotUS, would it have been wrong?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.2.17  TᵢG  replied to  Greg Jones @3.2.15    one month ago
... and Trump is doing his best to get these trials dismissed or delayed. Which is legal and what a reasonable person would do.

Why would a reasonable person want to delay a trial if they did nothing wrong?

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
3.2.18  MrFrost  replied to  Greg Jones @3.2.15    one month ago
Trump is doing his best to get these trials dismissed or delayed.

If he's innocent, why do that?

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
3.2.19  MrFrost  replied to  TᵢG @3.2.17    one month ago

Why would a reasonable person want to delay a trial if they did nothing wrong?

Bingo. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
3.2.20  Split Personality  replied to  Greg Jones @3.2.15    one month ago
or delayed.

and the only reason to do that is that is IF Trump is elected he can either 

delay the cases for four more years or have them all tossed out.

Justice delayed is justice denied, it goes both ways.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.2.21  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @3.2.10    one month ago

'flimsy evidence'

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
3.2.22  MrFrost  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.2.6    one month ago
haven't even requested them.

They're called, "registered voters", that's why they get a ballot.. Duh. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.3  Tessylo  replied to  MrFrost @3    one month ago

Ya!  The innocent ALWAYS ask for immunity.

jrSmiley_80_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.3.1  devangelical  replied to  Tessylo @3.3    one month ago

... like they do in all imperial presidencies.

 
 

Who is online

Ronin2


105 visitors