The case against the Defendants has not been tainted one iota.
Georgia judge considers eligibility of Fani Willis
- Thread starter cigaretteman
- Start date
He did not find they didn’t lie. He said it wasn’t proven they lied.
However, he also said they’d created such a mess and questions remained about their truthfulness in testimony such that the only way to eliminate the appearance of impropriety was for one of them to step away. “Odor of mendacity” I think he called it.
I thought whataboutisms were frowned upon around here.
Thomas will be ruling on if this very case is even constitutional. How is this whataboutism? He will be part of this exact case.
Burden is on the defense to prove she lied. They failed at that burden. I prefer the courts stick to actual facts, not rumors and gossip as the defense tried to introduce.
No it really isn't on the defense to prove that. It is on the prosecutor to be above suspicion. This case is not going anywhere now and the judge has allowed a reversible error.
Having not really paid that much attention to this sideshow up to now, but having read the actual opinion, i think the judge actually did a pretty decent job on the whole, both legally and in how he considered evidence.
His remedy is indeed interesting. One might take the position that 'if there's a problem, there's a problem, and you can't fix it by half.' But in its own way, i think his remedy is not going to go well for Willis.
I have little doubt that she'll hold on to the matter and ax Wade. In doing so, she'll underscore what, if her testimonial style is any indication, this seems to actually be about (ie, her). And in doing so, I think she'll reinforce what seems to be a bit of an emerging theme (still in its infancy but maybe getting a bit of momentum) about the scope of the 'lawfare' being waged against Trump.
Trump is stupid enough to want total victory in everything, but imo, this is a pretty good result for him, or perhaps as good as he could have reasonably expected, legally and politically.
His remedy is indeed interesting. One might take the position that 'if there's a problem, there's a problem, and you can't fix it by half.' But in its own way, i think his remedy is not going to go well for Willis.
I have little doubt that she'll hold on to the matter and ax Wade. In doing so, she'll underscore what, if her testimonial style is any indication, this seems to actually be about (ie, her). And in doing so, I think she'll reinforce what seems to be a bit of an emerging theme (still in its infancy but maybe getting a bit of momentum) about the scope of the 'lawfare' being waged against Trump.
Trump is stupid enough to want total victory in everything, but imo, this is a pretty good result for him, or perhaps as good as he could have reasonably expected, legally and politically.
That’s what the judge did.
It’s all evidence, some good, some not so good. I think the judge did a good job applying the law and describing who had the burden and how they didn’t meet the burden. But if you’ve read many court opinions you know he wasn’t buying their testimony.
It is. Sometimes. But apparently pulling stuff outta yer ass and not acknowledging the difference is fine. 😉
Honestly he sucked at this. The judge gave the defense way too much rope. He allowed rumors and gossip to be entertained and unverified phone data. And even then the defense came up donuts. Most of this shouldn't have even been considered
perhaps, but both sides had the ability to make their arguments about the admissibility of evidence. as i'm sure you know, criminal defendants do in fact get a fair bit of leeway to assert and establish their defenses, given that whole due process thingy.
Beyond that, i thought his opinion was quite specific about the length of rope given, and the limits on what the defense was able to prove. actually makes for a stronger opinion on appeal.
you are like trump in your own way huey - wrongly hoping for total victory in every shade of the political spectrum.
The outcome and every single thing about the case won’t be remembered for the strength of it.
It will be forever colored by the stain of her very poor judgment.
Understand that I’m not saying the merits of the case were shaky or anything about the facts.
I think most are just shaking their heads and saying why in the heck would you risk the case?
Lost in this back and forth is that it was NOT Trump’s lawyer who even started this.
Miss Merchant was the attorney for a co-defendant.
Geez, maybe Fani Willis shouldn’t have been so reckless and unprofessional. Easy way to avoid any of it.
SSH. Don’t interrupt him. He’s on a roll.
I mostly disagree. If she wins convictions she will be seen as triumphant - especially if she obtains racketeering convictions against Trump and Giuliani, an historic event.
I will concede that Willis cannot escape criticism for this episode, nor should she (and RW media will relentlessly hound her in any event), but it will fade drastically if the jury returns convictions.
Reckless and unprofessional yet still on the case. The whole thing is nonsense. If she truly was reckless and unprofessional this judge would have her yanked.
I paid pretty close attention to the defenses arguments. To say they were allowed leeway is generous. The judge was allowing gossip, which witnesses completely walked back once under oath to be heard. The stark truth is that the defense has nothing of legal merit and were just throwing hail Marys. Let's call this whole thing what it actually is. Flailing in hopes of getting her removed. It was a complete waste of time, which honestly was kind of the point.
She’s a dumas. There’s no defending this. She said as much when she was a candidate. I don’t remember the exact words. Jon Stewart played the video a few Monday nights ago. She basically said a state attorney should not be dating office employees.
We had accusations. They were found completely without legal merit. Keep arguing that there is something here. But we just had a month long investigation of whatever the defense could come up with and it went precisely nowhere. They and the judge wasted a lot of time for fruitless bounties.
Which has zero bearing on the actual case. It's all an exercise of morality, not legality, which not all sides even need to operate under. See my Clarence Thomas point.
Gossip is not evidence. Not sure why you are claiming so.
There is nothing there to help the defendants. I’ve said that several times before, probably in this thread. I never thought she brought the prosecution so she could hire her boyfriend and indirectly make money. It’s a dumb argument.
My point is Fani is an idiot - she, and she alone, allowed this by her ridiculous personal decisions. The judge found no actual conflict, but found that she and Wade had made such a mess one of them simply had to go. I think his opinion made sense.
I thought the Judge allowed way too broad and lengthy of an inquiry. Much of the crossX was duplicative or immaterial.
At no time did I hear any of the respective defense attorneys argue that their clients were somehow prejudiced.
Seems to me this could have been wrapped up within a week, maybe 10 days.
The judge likely did the prosecution a favor by allowing Cheeto’s legal team such wide latitude to make it’s claims. Had he not done that, the right wing media would have cranked the grievance machine to a thousand. They’re still going to make a lot of noise but the weeks of proceedings took a lot of wind out of any complaints about lack of fairness.
Yeah, I suppose a favor but was this judge being portrayed as unfair before the allegations?
I think it’s the same with all of the judges handling Trump’s and related matters. I think Cannon is aligned to Trump but the rest of them are going out of their way to give leeway to Trump and counsel. Kaplan in NY put up with a lot of nonsense from Trump and Habba - I can’t imagine the typical defendant getting that kind of grace.
Testimony is evidence according to fanni. Oh and she isn't on trial...yet. So no, there.isnt a burden of proof on the.defendents. the prosecutor has the burden to conduct themselves appropriately and in that Fanni and her team failed miserably. She deserves sanctions and needs to be disbarred. She can present her defense in that setting. She also needs to be criminally investigated and charged for fraud and perjury. She can have the benefits of being a defendent when that happens.
Zero chance anything on this case survives an appeal. What a shit show
Considering no other defendents had a law written specifically to step around statute of limitations and have had a matter brought deliberately under civil law due to a lower burden of proof the judge shpikdbt have ever let the case proceed. Ever. That trial was a true kangaroo court.
Gossip isn't admissable evidence. The rest of your post is based on nothing but your feelings.
The defendants filed a motion to dismiss and a motion to disqualify. They absolutely have the burden to prove sufficient grounds exist for dismissal and/or disqualification. They failed. The motions were not granted.
LOL, ever notice how anyone in the legal community on the other side of Trump in a case is tainted, or, a Mexican? I assume you were all knotted up inside over that dastardly unfair Judge Engoron and his clerk, who was totally making eye rolls in court and is probably a Biden DoJ operative.
You also are not familiar with how Ms. Merchant is being paid. The money trail leads back to Trump, and she had the goal of smearing Willis because the case against Trump is very strong. The case against all of them is strong, that's why several of them have taken pleas.
The judge probably is afraid of being murdered by a MAGA, or his kids being murdered by a MAGA, or ruling against Trump and having Trump's team creating scandals in his life. It is their pattern.
Slime? trump is running for president last I knew. lol
By the way, please let us know if the charges against trump and his allies are now different.
