Trump/Willis trial

[silverscreenselect]

There's an interesting sidelight in the Trump case involving both Fani Willis and Judge McAfee. Both of them are up for re-election this year. The primary for the District Attorney's office is May 21, with a runoff June 18 if no one gets a majority. The general election would be held on the national election day in November. Judicial elections in Georgia are non-partisan and held on the primary election date of May 21. The new terms of office for judge and district attorney begin January 1.

Judge McAfee has promised a decision in this case by March 15. However, this week is qualifying week for all elected offices, including judge and DA. The qualifying period ends March 8. Judicial elections are rarely contested but it's conceivable someone might run against McAfee if he makes a decision by the filing deadline. It's also possible someone may challenge Willis in the Democratic primary. (There will undoubtedly be a Republican candidate for DA, but Fulton County is heavily Democratic.) Again, a decision in this case may effect whether someone decides to run against Willis. So far, neither Willis nor McAfee has an opponent.

[flockofseagulls104]

Then there's this

one story about that

and this

Probably too little too late. My guess is that those witnesses came forward when they saw Bradley lying through his teeth. Too late to get them into the trial. But you know what? They are named. Not unnamed sources like the MSM likes to use. So they might actually be telling the truth. Not that it matters. This is a trial. OK, a hearing..... Only matters which group of lawyers is better at lying and what the political climate is. I used to have confidence in our system of justice. Now all I see is how it is used. booby and trollboy and their always unchangable and rigid evaluations despite anything always serves to confirm my mistrust. Yeah, trollboy, Mar-A-Lago is only worth 18 million. Maybe you can throw in the Brooklyn Bridge with that.

As trollboy says, the judge is up for re-election in Fulton, completely controlled from top on down by the democrats. And he is probably up against the same heat that Bradley was so afraid of. It was noted by some first hand observers that Bradley looked at Wade's table every time he was asked a difficult question. In one line of questioning the opposing attorney stood to block his view. So he looked at the video feed instead. But that's hearsay. Can't verify that.

[silverscreenselect]

Then there's this

one story about that

and this

None of these witnesses have first hand knowledge of when Willis and Wade's relationship began. None of them heard Willis or Wade contradict what they've said in court. All they can testify to is that Nathan Bradley shot his mouth off in front of a lot of people the same way he shot his mouth off via text to Roman's attorney. This is inadmissible. I'm not surprised Bradley shot his mouth off in front of other people. He seems like that sort of guy. That doesn't make what he says true.

Let's say Flock is on trial for having illicit relations with a goat. I go around saying I know for a fact that Flock had illicit relations with a goat. I send a bunch of texts to the goat's owner saying I know Flock had relations with a goat even though he's denied it. Then I get called to testify and admit I don't have any firsthand knowledge about Flock's love life; I was just speculating. It doesn't matter how many people I told out of court or via text. That isn't admissible as to the issue of whether Flock actually had relations with a goat.

[flockofseagulls104]

I was tempted, but I'm not going to engage in a tit-for-tat. Shows the depth of your character. You are really something, trollboy.

But a lot of speculation there on Mr. Bradley's part, I would say. And people who are willing to go under oath with it. He doesn't remember much, but, apparently, these people do. But as I said, you are a supposed lawyer. Nothing is going to sway you from your position. What the truth is doesn't matter to you in the least.

[flockofseagulls104]

More Problems for Fani. Who knows if Kemp will sign it.

There is also the Fulton County Ethics Board (If they have any)

And she has apparently ignored document subpoenas from the US Congress. Let's see what becomes of that.

She does not really have a good look. But trollboy will defend her til the end. Remember, what goes around comes around. None of this wasted time and money would have happened if the swamp hadn't started lawfare.

[silverscreenselect]

And people who are willing to go under oath with it. He doesn't remember much, but, apparently, these people do.

It doesn't matter how many people are willing to go under oath with it. It's hearsay and inadmissible. They didn't see Willis and Wade doing anything romantic. They didn't hear Willis and/or Wade admit to a relationship. They only heard Bradley make an unsworn out-of-court statement that the defense wants admitted as evidence the statement is true. It's the same as my goat example. If 10 people heard me tell them I had evidence Flock had relations with a goat, it's not admissible unless they actually witnessed it or heard Flock admit it.

[tlynn78]

And people who are willing to go under oath with it. He doesn't remember much, but, apparently, these people do.

It doesn't matter how many people are willing to go under oath with it. It's hearsay and inadmissible. They didn't see Willis and Wade doing anything romantic. They didn't hear Willis and/or Wade admit to a relationship. They only heard Bradley make an unsworn out-of-court statement that the defense wants admitted as evidence the statement is true. It's the same as my goat example. If 10 people heard me tell them I had evidence Flock had relations with a goat, it's not admissible unless they actually witnessed it or heard Flock admit it.

[flockofseagulls104]

And people who are willing to go under oath with it. He doesn't remember much, but, apparently, these people do.

It doesn't matter how many people are willing to go under oath with it. It's hearsay and inadmissible. They didn't see Willis and Wade doing anything romantic. They didn't hear Willis and/or Wade admit to a relationship. They only heard Bradley make an unsworn out-of-court statement that the defense wants admitted as evidence the statement is true. It's the same as my goat example. If 10 people heard me tell them I had evidence Flock had relations with a goat, it's not admissible unless they actually witnessed it or heard Flock admit it.

Oh, so now you're going to go with your goat thing.... Another Hannity special huh? You really get obsessed with things.

[Beebs52]

Sss is forgetting about certain facts in the trial that have been presented.

[flockofseagulls104]

Sss is forgetting about certain facts in the trial that have been presented.

He's speculating.....

[silverscreenselect]

Sss is forgetting about certain facts in the trial that have been presented.

There was one witness who testified that the relationship between Willis and Wade started before he was appointed, and that woman's credibility is somewhat suspect due to the circumstances under which she left the DA's office. Significantly, there's no background documentation to back that up.

And there's been no showing by anyone how whatever and whenever Willis and Wade were doing things and who paid what on the various trips affects Trump's and the other defendant's rights to a fair trial in this case. Or how there's any conflict of interest between Willis and/or Wade and anyone else involved in this case. And that's what the defense had to show and never did.

[flockofseagulls104]

Sss is forgetting about certain facts in the trial that have been presented.

There was one witness who testified that the relationship between Willis and Wade started before he was appointed, and that woman's credibility is somewhat suspect due to the circumstances under which she left the DA's office. Significantly, there's no background documentation to back that up.

And there's been no showing by anyone how whatever and whenever Willis and Wade were doing things and who paid what on the various trips affects Trump's and the other defendant's rights to a fair trial in this case. Or how there's any conflict of interest between Willis and/or Wade and anyone else involved in this case. And that's what the defense had to show and never did.

Ahhhh. Credibility. There's the word. Lotta lying going on. Who's telling the truth, if it even matters anymore? Probably none of them told the truth. They told the shade of the truth using weasel words that worked for them. Isn't that what they teach you in Acme Law School?

[flockofseagulls104]

Then there's this.

[flockofseagulls104]

What these rogue prosecutors should remember is: "Judge not lest ye be judged."

[silverscreenselect]

Then there's this.

Ashleigh Merchant is a sloppy lawyer. I'd like to hear Bob#### weigh in on this from a trial attorney perspective. She let her witness surprise her on the witness stand. She based her entire case on a bunch of text messages from a guy with a bad reputation. (I'm not sure if she actually ever met Bradley before this hearing.) One thing I do remember from my law school days is that you never rely solely on the testimony from your star witness. You buttress it with as much corroboration as possible. She had plenty of documentation showing Willis and Wade together after he was appointed, but nothing before. Where were his credit card receipts from that time? Why wasn't there any social media confirmation? Why weren't there any other witnesses? For something that was supposedly common knowledge, there didn't seem to be much actual knowledge of the facts.

Bradley may well have lied or misrepresented to her. But it's her fault for not nailing down his testimony. And now she's pleading her case in public.

[flockofseagulls104]

Then there's this.

Ashleigh Merchant is a sloppy lawyer. I'd like to hear Bob#### weigh in on this from a trial attorney perspective. She let her witness surprise her on the witness stand. She based her entire case on a bunch of text messages from a guy with a bad reputation. (I'm not sure if she actually ever met Bradley before this hearing.) One thing I do remember from my law school days is that you never rely solely on the testimony from your star witness. You buttress it with as much corroboration as possible. She had plenty of documentation showing Willis and Wade together after he was appointed, but nothing before. Where were his credit card receipts from that time? Why wasn't there any social media confirmation? Why weren't there any other witnesses? For something that was supposedly common knowledge, there didn't seem to be much actual knowledge of the facts.

Bradley may well have lied or misrepresented to her. But it's her fault for not nailing down his testimony. And now she's pleading her case in public.

So it continues.... You seem to acknowledge that Willis, Wade and Bradley are lying, but that doesn't matter to you. Your interest is that they get away with it so you can get Trump, who is being prosecuted based on mal-interpreted laws and weaseling logic by these same people. SCOTUS has pretty much confirmed, unanimously, that one of these lawfare attempts is brazenly bullshit. This one is too. We haven't even examined what the White House met with Wade about. Yes, you are a lawyer. Acme is proud of you.

And you really have gall saying 'pleading her case in public'. Your side has without end done that against Trump for years!

[silverscreenselect]

There's an interesting sidelight in the Trump case involving both Fani Willis and Judge McAfee. Both of them are up for re-election this year. The primary for the District Attorney's office is May 21, with a runoff June 18 if no one gets a majority. The general election would be held on the national election day in November. Judicial elections in Georgia are non-partisan and held on the primary election date of May 21. The new terms of office for judge and district attorney begin January 1.

Judge McAfee has promised a decision in this case by March 15. However, this week is qualifying week for all elected offices, including judge and DA. The qualifying period ends March 8. Judicial elections are rarely contested but it's conceivable someone might run against McAfee if he makes a decision by the filing deadline. It's also possible someone may challenge Willis in the Democratic primary. (There will undoubtedly be a Republican candidate for DA, but Fulton County is heavily Democratic.) Again, a decision in this case may effect whether someone decides to run against Willis. So far, neither Willis nor McAfee has an opponent.

According to the AJC, Atlanta defense attorney Robert Patillo plans to run against Scott McAfee. Patillo describes himself as a conservative Democrat, but he was the former executive director of Jesse Jackson's Rainbow PUSH Coalition, as well as a talk radio host and cable news analyst. He's appeared on CNN and Fox News. He will be limited by judicial ethical rules about what he can say about the current case, but he's already made one comment on X (fka Twitter), when Megyn Kelly posted a tweet calling his decision "terrible news for Team Trump in Atlanta." Patillo reply tweeted "They scared of little ole me?"

https://www.ajc.com/politics/civil-righ ... Y4Z6OZHG4/

[flockofseagulls104]

Patillo describes himself as a conservative Democrat

Lying already...

[silverscreenselect]

So it continues.... You seem to acknowledge that Willis, Wade and Bradley are lying, but that doesn't matter to you.

What you don't understand is that whether or not they are lying, it doesn't affect Trump's trial. It may be a matter for the bar ethics people, but it shouldn't have anything to do with this trial. Trump and the other defendants haven't shown a conflict or any prejudice to their interests.

[silverscreenselect]

And you really have gall saying 'pleading her case in public'. Your side has without end done that against Trump for years!

I'm not an attorney of record in this case. That would be a different story.

[flockofseagulls104]

So it continues.... You seem to acknowledge that Willis, Wade and Bradley are lying, but that doesn't matter to you.

What you don't understand is that whether or not they are lying, it doesn't affect Trump's trial. It may be a matter for the bar ethics people, but it shouldn't have anything to do with this trial. Trump and the other defendants haven't shown a conflict or any prejudice to their interests.

Damn it trollboy, how many times does it have to be repeated for you? I don't understand anything about anything. Don't you ever glance at my signature? That has already been established by you or one of your comrades. I am only here to find out everything you understand better than everyone else in the f*ing world does.

Oh, and to have new and more clever epithets hurled at me.

[silverscreenselect]

The Fulton County Board of Ethics dismissed two complaints that have been filed against DA Fani Willis, saying it did not have jurisdiction to hear them. "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. “The Fulton County Code of Ethics, our code of ethics, only applies to county officers and employees,” Satcher said, reading a prepared statement."

In case anyone wonders, the Ethics Board comprises seven members:

(1) One member to be nominated by the president of the Atlanta Bar Association from among the Association’s membership;

(2) One member to be nominated by the president of the Gate City Bar Association from among the Association’s membership;

(3) One member to be nominated by the president of the North Fulton Chamber of Commerce from among the Chamber’s membership;

(4) One member to be nominated by the president of the Atlanta Business League from the membership of the Atlanta Business League;

(5) One member to be nominated by the president of the Atlanta Airport Chamber of Commerce from among the Chamber's membership;

(6) One member to be nominated by the personnel board of the county from its membership; and

(7) One member to be nominated and appointed by the board of commissioners.

A bit of explanation. Although Fani Willis is usually referred to as the Fulton County DIstrict Attorney, that's actually a state office. Georgia is divided into 49 judicial circuits, each of which has its own Superior Court judge or judges and its own District Attorney. Fulton County has its own circuit, but some circuits are comprised of several smaller counties. So Fani Willis is actually the District Attorney for the Fulton County Judicial Circuit. Similarly, Judge McAfee is a Superior Court Judge for the Fulton County Judicial Circuit.

[silverscreenselect]

There's an interesting sidelight in the Trump case involving both Fani Willis and Judge McAfee. Both of them are up for re-election this year. The primary for the District Attorney's office is May 21, with a runoff June 18 if no one gets a majority. The general election would be held on the national election day in November. Judicial elections in Georgia are non-partisan and held on the primary election date of May 21. The new terms of office for judge and district attorney begin January 1.

Judge McAfee has promised a decision in this case by March 15. However, this week is qualifying week for all elected offices, including judge and DA. The qualifying period ends March 8. Judicial elections are rarely contested but it's conceivable someone might run against McAfee if he makes a decision by the filing deadline. It's also possible someone may challenge Willis in the Democratic primary. (There will undoubtedly be a Republican candidate for DA, but Fulton County is heavily Democratic.) Again, a decision in this case may effect whether someone decides to run against Willis. So far, neither Willis nor McAfee has an opponent.

Both Fani Willis and Scott McAfee will have two opponents in upcoming elections. Christian Wise Smith, who describes himself as a progressive Democrat, will run in the primary. He ran against Willis and then-incumbent Paul Howard in the 2020 primary and finished third. He also ran for attorney general in 2022 and was badly beaten in the primary. He has vowed he will not seek the death penalty in any cases and wants to decriminalize drug possession. He feels Willis is too conservative. He has said he'll wait until the results of the disqualification hearing to decide how vigorously to campaign but for now he's preserving his actions. Attorney Courtney Kramer will run as a Republican. She served as a litigation consultant for Trump's legal team after the 2020 election. She has promised to end the Trump prosecution if elected. The Democratic primary is May 21.

Scott McAfee also has two opponents in his non-partisan race. In addition to Robert Patillo, who I mentioned elsewhere in this thread, Tiffani Johnson will run. She's a senior staff attorney for another Fulton County Superior Court judge. McAfee's election is also May 21. If no one receives a majority of the votes, there will be a runoff June 18.

[jarnon]

Judge McAfee’s ruling:

Order on Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss and Disqualify the Fulton County District Attorney

The behavior that Willis is accused of would be a gross lack of judgment, to say the least.

The hearing now is only about dismissing the RICO case. Regardless of the outcome, Willis should and will face other consequences.

This finding is by no means an indication that the Court condones this tremendous lapse in judgment … Other forums or sources of authority such as the General Assembly, the Georgia State Ethics Commission, the State Bar of Georgia, the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, or the voters of Fulton County may offer feedback on any unanswered questions that linger.

McAfee offers another suggestion:

The time may well have arrived for an order preventing the State from mentioning the case in any public forum to prevent prejudicial pretrial publicity, but that is not the motion presently before the Court.

Trump will love this idea. It’s payback for all the gag orders that have been slapped on him.