Georgia RICO Case: Nineteen Defendants And Counting

[WatchingTheTireFireBurn]

Maybe it's just me, but if I was involved in any way a trial that is definitely going to be hyper analyzed and picked apart for the rest of US history...I'd wear some pants, just in case.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

I hope SCOTUS doesn’t save him.

 

[TN-peach]

On 2/15/2024 at 2:35 PM, Destiny said:

Clearly I need to read up but I can't imagine how that could be true, unless they are flat out embezzling. Without knowing much, I'm going to guess that she's not doing that and we are just shaming a woman for having sex while working in a taxpayer-funded position.

Note: if she WAS using taxpayer funds for vacations then she obviously deserves to be sitting in a defendant's seat herself, but I can't imagine how Trump's issues would be related so this sounds more like slut shaming to me.

It is because Wade is basically a contract employee. He is getting paid more than the typical ADA.  The allegation is that because he is the special prosecutor and is getting paid more and she is the elected one and gets to select who gets the contract then was there a kickback.  Intraoffice romances happen but that would mean that people are being paid roughly the same.  In this case, was Wade picked because Fani was having an affair with him and did he pay her back with lavish vacations?  So it does matter when the affair started. 

Natalie the Lawyer Chick had a good video on the closing arguments if you want to watch it.  My personal opinion is that there is enough there an "appearance of impropriety."   The question though is does it matter for a prosecutor?Why would you want to muddy the waters in such a political case like this one.  This one needs to be as clean as possible.  Also, she could also just recuse herself, appoint some one from office to oversee the special prosecutor and create a chinese wall between herself and the supervisor.  That would eliminate the appearance of impropriety.  Also, Ms. Willis took a huge risk taking the stand. If she were to have perjured herself, every indictment that she signs/ed would then be questioned.  The repercussions of her testimony are huge. 

[fraurosena]

Fani Willis gets the option to remain on the case!

Rest of text: but not without a rebuke of Willis’s “lapse of judgment.”

 

 

Apparently the defense has the right to appeal, but needs to do so before March 25.

[fraurosena]

And here's the unofficial notification of appeal.

 

[CTRLZero]

In the Joyce Vance “X” above, she mentions:  “Let's hope the courts take this equally seriously when it comes to the conduct of a fed'l judge in Florida.”  What is this referring to?  (It may come to me, but my brain is fuzzy right now.)  

[fraurosena]

Wade has resigned.

 

4 hours ago, CTRLZero said:

In the Joyce Vance “X” above, she mentions:  “Let's hope the courts take this equally seriously when it comes to the conduct of a fed'l judge in Florida.”  What is this referring to?  (It may come to me, but my brain is fuzzy right now.)  

She's referring to Judge Cannon, the Trump appointee who is constantly doing Trump favors in the Mar-a-Lago documents case.

 

[CTRLZero]

32 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

She's referring to Judge Cannon, the Trump appointee who is constantly doing Trump favors in the Mar-a-Lago documents case.

Thank you!  I wondered if that was the case, but thought maybe I’d missed yet another corrupt judge…. 

[TN-peach]

Hopefully, with Wade’s resignation the case can go forward but I’m sure the defendants will try more shenanigans. 

[fraurosena]

Sigh. Another roadblock has been thrown up. This time there has been an application for the disqualification of Fani Willis, and Judge McAfee has granted the certificate for immediate review. 

From the unrolled version of the thread:

... it will be assigned to a staff attorney who will review the application and any supporting materials. That attorney will provide a memo providing a recommendation to the judge on whether the appeal should be granted or denied. The court has 45 days to act, so decisions are quick. 

Court of Appeals Rule 30(a) provides factors that favor review. The most important one here will be whether there is a need to establish clear precedent to refine and guide the trial court. Defendants will have to argue that precedent is insufficient *and* this is a good vehicle. 

The other key is this: is there *reversible error*? Even if there might be a need for some clarification around the law, the COA may not necessarily see the need to step in and reverse Judge McAfee if they think he essentially got it right. That may be the biggest hurdle for Ds. 

Appeals are heard by a three-judge panel. Only one judge on a panel needs to agree to hear the appeal. All three are thus required to agree to deny it.

[fraurosena]

Trump loses again. Good.

 

 

[AnywhereButHere]

Another day - another loss. May this continue all the way through the election. 

[Howl]

John Eastman Eastman is at the center of a ETTD - FAFO Venn diagram.

He owes a bazillion dollars in his own legal bills, he's defending multiple people against this and that related to constitutional law, and Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene want him to defend them against I can't remember what and his California law license was deactivated late last week. He hasn't been disbarred yet, that has to happen via the CA Supreme Court. 

Excerpt from John Eastman wants to keep practicing law, representing Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene – and paying his own bills (CNN)

“If the Order placing Dr. Eastman on inactive enrollment were not stayed, Dr. Eastman would lose his ability to make a living as an attorney at a time when other matters arising out of his representation of the former President of the United States … have already caused him to incur more than $1 million in legal fees,” his attorneys wrote in his request this week to the judge in California. 

“The loss of income from the practice of law in the face of such necessity would be highly prejudicial to Dr. Eastman’s ability to defend himself in Fulton County,” they wrote.

Eastman says his legal fees could increase to $3 million or more as he faces a criminal trial in Fulton County, Georgia, in the state-level conspiracy case alongside Trump related to the 2020 election.

Eastman also told the judge he no longer represents Trump in election challenges, thus is no longer a threat to the public or his client.   That's a hell of an argument.

Edited April 9 by Howl

[Ozlsn]

16 hours ago, Howl said:

Excerpt from John Eastman wants to keep practicing law, representing Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene – and paying his own bills (CNN)

Given how utterly dodgy his legal advice was... is he sure MTG and Gaetz want him to keep representing them?

Also seriously I have no sympathy. He took a risk with his legal licence and lost. Go and work at McDonalds and pay your legal costs that way.

[WatchingTheTireFireBurn]

yeah screw him.....so doctors and licensed everybody can just do whatever no matter the legal or ethical consequences ...because we have bills to pay??

seriously? these people make me so ragey.