GA - Former President Donald Trump indicted, 10 counts in 2020 election interference, violation of RICO Act, 14 Aug 2023 #2

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think he also realizes that Kennedy did the same thing in 1960 in Hawaii and it didn't result in indictments or anything at all. This story appeared in Politico months ago and the media has thoroughly covered it.
JMO


...Until now, it’s been unclear whether the 1960 case of the Kennedy electors was truly analogous to 2020 Trump electors. But the unofficial Democratic certificates, obtained by POLITICO from the non-digitized files of the National Archives, show the three Kennedy electors signed documents that are remarkably similar to the false Trump-elector certificates.

The certificates describe the three Democrats as the “duly and legally appointed and qualified” members of the Electoral College. The envelope containing the certificates, stamped Dec. 22, 1960, includes another avowal: “We hereby certify that the lists of all the votes of the state of Hawaii given for president … are contained herein.”

The documents do not mention the ongoing recount or that Nixon’s Hawaii victory had been certified.

Instead, the Hawaii Democrats used virtually the same language that the false Trump electors in five states used in their effort to upend the 2020 race. In those documents — from Arizona, Nevada, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia — the pro-Turmp activists described themselves as “duly elected and qualified.” In two other states, Pennsylvania and New Mexico, Trump allies submitted alternative elector slates but included a caveat: their votes would only be counted if ongoing court battles broke in favor of Trump.

This link goes into exhaustive (and exhausting) detail about the recounts in Hawaii in 1960. I think there may be a few more details to supplement the great info from @IzzyBlanche. The point to all this is that the situation in 1960 was quite different from 2020 and I don’t see how defense attorneys can make a comparison that will work.
JMO


<snipped lots of detail>

Kennedy's Lead Grows to 96 - Full Recount Ordered

On the day before the electors were set to vote, Kennedy's lead in the Hawaii recount of 95 1/2 precincts had risen to 96 votes. Kennedy had gained a total of 237 votes since the beginning of the recount. As a result, Circuit Judge Ronald B. Jamieson ordered a recount of all the state's 240 precincts.

The Electors Vote Twice

Hawaii then cast two sets of electoral votes. The three Republican electors entered special voting booths in the plush throne room of the Iolani Palace and cast ballots for the Nixon-Lodge ticket. They were followed by the three Democrats who voted for Kennedy and Johnson on the basis of a partial recount showing Kennedy in the lead.

Some Republicans suggested that the voting booths be removed before the Democrats could vote, but the Lieutenant Governor's office allowed the booths to remain. Removing them would have made no technical difference.

If the full recount gave Kennedy the state, it would be up to Congress to decide who is entitled to Hawaii's three electoral votes. That is because Governor Quinn could not issue new certificates of election since the deadline had passed.

<snipped lots of recounting>
The Judge's Ruling

Circuit Judge Ronald B. Jamieson then ruled that John F. Kennedy won the election in Hawaii by a 115 vote margin. The ruling was made an official part of the record which the Democrats sent to Congress.

Senator Oren F. Long and Representative Daniel K. Inouye would present the Democratic argument for certification of Kennedy as the winner of Hawaii's first presidential election.

Nixon Adds Hawaii's 3 Electoral Votes To Kennedy's Column

On Friday, January 6, 1961, the electoral votes were tallied by roll-call in a joint session of Congress with Vice-President Richard M. Nixon presiding.

The roll-call went smoothly until Hawaii was reached. There were three sets of documents for Hawaii, which finally went to Kennedy after the official recount which had not been completed when the electors met in Honolulu on December 19th.

The tellers tossed that problem into Nixon's lap, and the Vice-President held without opposition that the latest document, dated January 4 and certifying the Kennedy electors, was the one that should be counted.

That made the presidential tally 303 for Kennedy, 219 for Nixon and 15 for Senator Harry F. Byrd of Virginia.

The outgoing Vice-President presided over the joint session under a constitutional provision that requires Congress to canvass the electoral votes. The votes actually were cast on December 19 by the electors of the 50 states.

Hawaii's vote was originally certified for Nixon, who held a 141 vote margin before a recount swung the state to Kennedy by 115 votes.

Objections Not Necessary

Hawaii's Democratic Senator Oren E. Long and Democratic Representative Daniel K. Inouye had laid plans to object to the count of the Nixon certificate, based on the original island vote count, if it was made official.

Long and Inouye came to the joint session carrying folders of documents to support their pro-Kennedy arguments, and Hawaii's Republican Senator Hiram L. Fong said he would not dispute the Kennedy vote.

When the joint session convened, Inouye seated himself in front of a microphone, opened his folder and motioned to his colleagues that he was prepared to present his objection.

When Nixon came to Hawaii in the state-by-state roll call, Long also opened his folder containing the Kennedy certificate and showed the impressive document to his fellow Senators.

The certificate that Nixon honored - thereby making Long's and Inouye's objection unnecessary - was mailed from Hawaii Wednesday night.

Governor William F. Quinn, a Republican, signed a certificate on Wednesday, January 4, accepting the Democratic electors and urging Congress to accept the Democratic victory when it counted the presidential votes on Friday January 6th.

The certificates reached Washington only hours before Congress convened.

When Hawaii was called, the certificates casting the state's votes for Nixon were presented, followed by those for Kennedy and the affidavit from Governor Quinn.

If there was objection to accepting the Democratic vote, Senator Oren E. Long and Congressman Daniel K. Inouye were ready to start a floor fight.

But Vice-President Nixon ruled that to expedite the count and with no desire to set a precedent, he would accept the votes of the Democratic electors from Hawaii.

And that’s why Nixon was able to come back eight years later to be elected president.
 

A lawyer sued former President Donald Trump on Thursday, claiming that Trump is ineligible to serve another term as president due to his involvement in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riots.

"Section 3 of the 14th Amendment [of the U.S. Constitution], automatically excludes from future office and position of power in the U.S. government ... any individual who has previously taken an oath to support and defend our Constitution and after which acts so as to rebel against that charter," attorney Lawrence Caplan wrote in his lawsuit filed with the U.S. District Court in South Florida.

Caplan argues that Trump's role in the storming of the Capitol and overturn the 2020 presidential election results constitutes a violation of this section of the Constitution.
More at link........
 
This link is amazeballs. thanks for posting it!!


My prediction is that Kemp stays out of it just as politicans should stay out of Judcial processes. Most likely with a "No comment as I will let the judicial process play out". Rightly so given the three Branches and their Constitutional Seperation.

I suspect any eventual move by any Committee to remove Willis, and they do have the authority to remove persons based upon this law signed by Kemp, will be appealed and lost in the higher court precisely because of this bit of that law (you know, as cited within the actual article being posted in here earlier and re-cited within this post too):

The letter, obtained exclusively by USA TODAY, comes at time when Republican governors are cracking down on liberal-leaning prosecutors and it cites a state law signed by Kemp this year creating a new panel, dubbed the Prosecuting Attorneys Qualifications Commission, that can discipline, remove or apply measures against prosecutors who are not following the law.
...
In Georgia, the only direct power a governor has to suspend a district attorney is if they are indicted for a felony. If the district attorney is then convicted, the governor can remove them from the position.

... the new panel mentioned in Jackson's letter has the power to remove a district attorney. He called it the "first of its sort in the country," saying a similar commission in New York can only recommend disciplinary actions against a prosecutor.
...
Georgia Republicans pitched the change as an oversight policy, which Kemp celebrated in May as a way to hold "rogue or incompetent prosecutors" accountable
...

1) Willis is following the law of Georgia. She has actually, as posted on this very site, detailed the laws that Indicted Co-conspirators are being charged with an under in the publicly available (and cited within this very thread) Georgia RICO Indictments on 10 Counts of Election Interferance (see thread title). That is her performing her job in role as the Fulton County District Attorney;

2) Given the legal citations of law etc, and the Grand Juries recommendations of charges along with her legal 'wins' thus far in the case in Judge's favourable rulings etc "rogue and incompetent" doesn't cut it; and

3) She hasn't been convicted of any felonies nor charged - let alone investigated for or convicted of any corruption crimes.

And for all those yelling about this being a purely political prosecution, despite there being probable cause and indictments issued for those charged by a Grand Jury of "We the People" ... also from the article:

- Many state and national GOP lawmakers, not to mention Trump himself, have criticized Willis as a "partisan hack" and have proposed launching investigations and pursuing sanctions against her over the case
- Willis is facing growing scrutiny outside of the Peach State, especially with Trump's allies in Washington.
- The Republican-led House Judiciary Committee sent a letter to her on Thursday launching an inquiry ...
... ... It isn't the first time House GOP lawmakers went after a prosecutor.

How's that for respecting the bounds of Constitutional Seperation. Talk about one branch of government making things "political" and interfering in another branches pie. It sure is happening, but I do not think that means what some people think it means.

In Georgia they nail them for doing their job to prosecute ... in Florida they nail them for not doing their job to prosecute. Oh were it not for the political irony in that. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Shawn Still, one of the Georgia fake electors, is trying to move the case to federal court. I don't know if that makes sense given that electors represent the state. Will be interesting to see the decision on that.

Also look like he is willing to cooperate:
"Mr. Still, as a presidential elector, was also acting at the direction of the incumbent president of the United States," Still's attorney Thomas Bever... 'The president's attorneys instructed Mr. Still and the other contingent electors that they had to meet and cast their ballots on Dec. 14, 2020.'"

Will D.A. Willis cut a deal for cooperation or say it's too late?

 
Shawn Still, one of the Georgia fake electors, is trying to move the case to federal court. I don't know if that makes sense given that electors represent the state. Will be interesting to see the decision on that.

Also look like he is willing to cooperate:
"Mr. Still, as a presidential elector, was also acting at the direction of the incumbent president of the United States," Still's attorney Thomas Bever... 'The president's attorneys instructed Mr. Still and the other contingent electors that they had tv meet and cast their ballots on Dec. 14, 2020.'"

Will D.A. Willis cut a deal for cooperation or say it's too late?

Replying to myself as I thought of something else. At first I was thinking Shawn Still is a "low-level" guy and a deal should be cut.

But, he isn't really low-level but the "former Georgia GOP Finance Chairman." It's fair to expect the person in charge of the state GOP finances would know right from wrong with procedures. And, if the finances are managed by someone corrupt, I hope D.A. Willis doesn't make a deal. People need to be able to trust their leaders, including in their state's political party roles. And when leaders break trust, they need to be held accountable under the law.

The "fake electors" term doesn't sound dangerous, but it is. The electors were the tools to overturn the American presidential election, to disregard the votes cast by the people of the state.

The rot is deep, imo.

jmo
 
Last edited:
Thanks for posting this article @MyBelle. It shows the lengths the Republican Party at the state and national level is going to protect Donald Trump from the consequences of his actions (not just in this case). Although I don’t want to derail the thread into a discussion of other cases that have their own threads, it’s worth mentioning so that googling can be done by those who want to know more. There is a very real ability to remove Fani Willis from office starting when this law goes into effect October 1, although I believe there is already a court case filed against this law, so we shall see.

JMO
I can't handle following more legal actions! I hope people periodically keep us up-to-date on this, for those whose brains will burst with one more case.

jmo
 
This link is amazeballs. thanks for posting it!!


My prediction is that Kemp stays out of it just as politicans should stay out of Judcial processes. Most likely with a "No comment as I will let the judicial process play out". Rightly so given the three Branches and their Constitutional Seperation.

I suspect any eventual move by any Committee to remove Willis, and they do have the authority to remove persons based upon this law signed by Kemp, will be appealed and lost in the higher court precisely because of this bit of that law (you know, as cited within the actual article being posted in here earlier and re-cited within this post too):



1) Willis is following the law of Georgia. She has actually, as posted on this very site, detailed the laws that Indicted Co-conspirators are being charged with an under in the publicly available (and cited within this very thread) Georgia RICO Indictments on 10 Counts of Election Interferance (see thread title). That is her performing her job in role as the Fulton County District Attorney;

2) Given the legal citations of law etc, and the Grand Juries recommendations of charges along with her legal 'wins' thus far in the case in Judge's favourable rulings etc "rogue and incompetent" doesn't cut it; and

3) She hasn't been convicted of any felonies nor charged - let alone investigated for or convicted of any corruption crimes.

And for all those yelling about this being a purely political prosecution, despite there being probable cause and indictments issued for those charged by a Grand Jury of "We the People" ... also from the article:



How's that for respecting the bounds of Constitutional Seperation. Talk about one branch of government making things "political" and interfering in another branches pie. It sure is happening, but I do not think that means what some people think it means.

In Georgia they nail them for doing their job to prosecute ... in Florida they nail them for not doing their job to prosecute. Oh were it not for the political irony in that. :rolleyes:

Here’s the info on the suit Sherry Boston, DeKalb’s DA, filed on behalf of many Ga DA’s Georgia DAs file lawsuit to strike down newly-created prosecutorial oversight commission
 
BBM. That isn't remotely true but if you want to believe it, that's okay.

Questioning the outcome of an election is not a crime. Trump and his supporters genuinely thought Pence could refuse to certify the electoral votes for several states because they wanted to do recounts. Pence (an attorney) wasn't sure if it was possible, so he consulted an attorney who told him Eastman's proposal would be challenged. A grand jury indictment is not evidence of a crime. Eastman's proposal wasn't a crime.

There are these things called "Rights" such as Due Process, Fair Trial, Impartial Jury that come into play for American defendants. Not everyone who is arrested is found guilty at trial.

JMO
I'm pretty well versed in the 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th and 14th amendments as I really like following criminal cases but thank you for the reminder that there are things called "Rights".

An indictment is literally a formal accusation of committing a crime; doing something illegal; breaking the law. A crime happened. It's just a factual thing. Now, that doesn't mean the person indicted definitively committed said crime as the trial determines guilt.

You've stated that Trump honestly believed his attorneys, he'd won, etc. which is a legal defense that he can present at his trial but it doesn't mean a crime didn't occur - it would mean he isn't guilty of the crime because of his legal defense. As has been pointed out ad nauseum there are legal routes for contesting an election and after those failed (and I believe it's important to stress ONLY after those failed) he attempted to bypass the legal route. Anything that happened after as a means of keeping Trump in power thereby became illegal - every phone call, every letter, every lie about election fraud, every threat, hence why we have a RICO charge - it's one big, bad corrupt plot.

Maybe Trump didn't know. Maybe his attorneys misled him. Maybe he well and truly believed he did indeed win (though there's evidence in the indictments to indicate he did know he lost) - and if so, we'll see it presented at the trial to ajudicate his guilt for the crimes he is accused of - and as you well know, he's not been charged with challenging an election because that, as a candidate, is well within his rights to do - legally.

One last thing - imagine this was a murder trial and the defense argument is that it was an accidental death and not a homicide. The jury acquits which means the defendant is not guilty BUT that doesn't mean a death that was ruled a homicide suddenly becomes an accidental death because that's not for the jury to decide. They can acquit because they believed the defendant's legal defense.

It just is not the same as stating unequivocally a crime didn't occur. JMO

ETA: Anyone else feel like coming to the Trump threads is a little like going through the looking glass? I can't think of another case I've followed here that's been like that.
 
Last edited:
This link is amazeballs. thanks for posting it!!


My prediction is that Kemp stays out of it just as politicans should stay out of Judcial processes. Most likely with a "No comment as I will let the judicial process play out". Rightly so given the three Branches and their Constitutional Seperation.

I suspect any eventual move by any Committee to remove Willis, and they do have the authority to remove persons based upon this law signed by Kemp, will be appealed and lost in the higher court precisely because of this bit of that law (you know, as cited within the actual article being posted in here earlier and re-cited within this post too):



1) Willis is following the law of Georgia. She has actually, as posted on this very site, detailed the laws that Indicted Co-conspirators are being charged with an under in the publicly available (and cited within this very thread) Georgia RICO Indictments on 10 Counts of Election Interferance (see thread title). That is her performing her job in role as the Fulton County District Attorney;

2) Given the legal citations of law etc, and the Grand Juries recommendations of charges along with her legal 'wins' thus far in the case in Judge's favourable rulings etc "rogue and incompetent" doesn't cut it; and

3) She hasn't been convicted of any felonies nor charged - let alone investigated for or convicted of any corruption crimes.

And for all those yelling about this being a purely political prosecution, despite there being probable cause and indictments issued for those charged by a Grand Jury of "We the People" ... also from the article:



How's that for respecting the bounds of Constitutional Seperation. Talk about one branch of government making things "political" and interfering in another branches pie. It sure is happening, but I do not think that means what some people think it means.

In Georgia they nail them for doing their job to prosecute ... in Florida they nail them for not doing their job to prosecute. Oh were it not for the political irony in that. :rolleyes:

THANK YOU for this post! I started trying to put together something similar regarding this situation and the separation of the three branches of government…but my thoughts got all tangled up and I had to stop! I’m so glad you were able to express my thoughts so clearly and succinctly. :-) The passage of these state laws and the attempted interference by congress in judicial proceedings is setting an extremely dangerous precedent. The Founding Fathers would be horrified!
JMO
 
This link is amazeballs. thanks for posting it!!


My prediction is that Kemp stays out of it just as politicans should stay out of Judcial processes. Most likely with a "No comment as I will let the judicial process play out". Rightly so given the three Branches and their Constitutional Seperation.

I suspect any eventual move by any Committee to remove Willis, and they do have the authority to remove persons based upon this law signed by Kemp, will be appealed and lost in the higher court precisely because of this bit of that law (you know, as cited within the actual article being posted in here earlier and re-cited within this post too):



1) Willis is following the law of Georgia. She has actually, as posted on this very site, detailed the laws that Indicted Co-conspirators are being charged with an under in the publicly available (and cited within this very thread) Georgia RICO Indictments on 10 Counts of Election Interferance (see thread title). That is her performing her job in role as the Fulton County District Attorney;

2) Given the legal citations of law etc, and the Grand Juries recommendations of charges along with her legal 'wins' thus far in the case in Judge's favourable rulings etc "rogue and incompetent" doesn't cut it; and

3) She hasn't been convicted of any felonies nor charged - let alone investigated for or convicted of any corruption crimes.

And for all those yelling about this being a purely political prosecution, despite there being probable cause and indictments issued for those charged by a Grand Jury of "We the People" ... also from the article:



How's that for respecting the bounds of Constitutional Seperation. Talk about one branch of government making things "political" and interfering in another branches pie. It sure is happening, but I do not think that means what some people think it means.

In Georgia they nail them for doing their job to prosecute ... in Florida they nail them for not doing their job to prosecute. Oh were it not for the political irony in that. :rolleyes:
Politicians in Georgia passed a law so that they can remove District Attorneys. Gov. Kemp agreed. That's the reality in Georgia. It is no different than in Florida where Gov. DeSantis has already removed several District Attorneys from their positions.

JMO
 
Is it just me or has their been a shift in what the defendant's fans are talking about. For awhile the main topic seemed to be questioning whether the vote count was indeed accurate, stating they still had questions. That idea held strong.

But that argument seem to have subsided in favor of stating over and over again that a candidate has a right to question the election results...to which everyone agrees!

The defendants are not charged with legally questioning the elections results but that they "knowingly and willfully joined a conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump."

And I sense it's shifting again and the new argument is to get rid of D.A. Willis. Yeah, that's the ticket.


jmo

 
Politicians in Georgia passed a law so that they can remove District Attorneys. Gov. Kemp agreed. That's the reality in Georgia. It is no different than in Florida where Gov. DeSantis has already removed several District Attorneys from their positions.

JMO

It sounds like what you’re saying is that politicians in Georgia have passed a law specifically to remove District Attorneys…the timing of which may conveniently remove Fani Willis and protect Donald Trump. Politicians have passed a law to prevent a DA from following the law when it applies to Donald Trump. Politicians have passed a law that takes “checks and balances” to the point that the legislative branch controls the judiciary branch when it suits them politically. So the reality in Georgia is that politicians are hoping to override a DA doing her job…that she was elected and swore an oath to do.…when it applies to Donald Trump.

It honestly blows my mind that the “needs” of Donald Trump motivate politicians to abandon any pretense of adhering to the constitution, not just in Georgia and in this particular situation, but across the nation into the Halls of Congress. This national ”folie a deux“ (for lack of a better descriptor) in service of Trump, trumps any label of “political hack” you can heap on Fani Willis. We can only hope that Gov. Kemp, who signed this law instead of vetoing it, will not allow it to be used as a political bludgeon to protect Donald Trump from standing trial and override the will of Georgians of Fulton county who elected Fani Willis. Talk about “election interference”!
JMO
 
It sounds like what you’re saying is that politicians in Georgia have passed a law specifically to remove District Attorneys…the timing of which may conveniently remove Fani Willis and protect Donald Trump. Politicians have passed a law to prevent a DA from following the law when it applies to Donald Trump. Politicians have passed a law that takes “checks and balances” to the point that the legislative branch controls the judiciary branch when it suits them politically. So the reality in Georgia is that politicians are hoping to override a DA doing her job…that she was elected and swore an oath to do.…when it applies to Donald Trump.

It honestly blows my mind that the “needs” of Donald Trump motivate politicians to abandon any pretense of adhering to the constitution, not just in Georgia and in this particular situation, but across the nation into the Halls of Congress. This national ”folie a deux“ (for lack of a better descriptor) in service of Trump, trumps any label of “political hack” you can heap on Fani Willis. We can only hope that Gov. Kemp, who signed this law instead of vetoing it, will not allow it to be used as a political bludgeon to protect Donald Trump from standing trial and override the will of Georgians of Fulton county who elected Fani Willis. Talk about “election interference”!
JMO
His supporters believe anything he says and repeat it uncritically. They don’t seem to understand the separation of powers and that having strongmen that brag about eliminating DA’s who don’t carry their political water is anti-American. They don’t understand the rule of law and don’t share American ideals of fair play and peaceful sharing of power. JMO.
 
It sounds like what you’re saying is that politicians in Georgia have passed a law specifically to remove District Attorneys…the timing of which may conveniently remove Fani Willis and protect Donald Trump. Politicians have passed a law to prevent a DA from following the law when it applies to Donald Trump. Politicians have passed a law that takes “checks and balances” to the point that the legislative branch controls the judiciary branch when it suits them politically. So the reality in Georgia is that politicians are hoping to override a DA doing her job…that she was elected and swore an oath to do.…when it applies to Donald Trump.

It honestly blows my mind that the “needs” of Donald Trump motivate politicians to abandon any pretense of adhering to the constitution, not just in Georgia and in this particular situation, but across the nation into the Halls of Congress. This national ”folie a deux“ (for lack of a better descriptor) in service of Trump, trumps any label of “political hack” you can heap on Fani Willis. We can only hope that Gov. Kemp, who signed this law instead of vetoing it, will not allow it to be used as a political bludgeon to protect Donald Trump from standing trial and override the will of Georgians of Fulton county who elected Fani Willis. Talk about “election interference”!
JMO

Reading this made me feel physically nauseous.

This is crazy and wrong.
 
It sounds like what you’re saying is that politicians in Georgia have passed a law specifically to remove District Attorneys…the timing of which may conveniently remove Fani Willis and protect Donald Trump. Politicians have passed a law to prevent a DA from following the law when it applies to Donald Trump. Politicians have passed a law that takes “checks and balances” to the point that the legislative branch controls the judiciary branch when it suits them politically. So the reality in Georgia is that politicians are hoping to override a DA doing her job…that she was elected and swore an oath to do.…when it applies to Donald Trump.

It honestly blows my mind that the “needs” of Donald Trump motivate politicians to abandon any pretense of adhering to the constitution, not just in Georgia and in this particular situation, but across the nation into the Halls of Congress. This national ”folie a deux“ (for lack of a better descriptor) in service of Trump, trumps any label of “political hack” you can heap on Fani Willis. We can only hope that Gov. Kemp, who signed this law instead of vetoing it, will not allow it to be used as a political bludgeon to protect Donald Trump from standing trial and override the will of Georgians of Fulton county who elected Fani Willis. Talk about “election interference”!
JMO
I don't believe the "needs" of Donald Trump have motivated Georgia politicians to pass any laws. I believe it is their core belief system that motivates them. Georgia voters have elected them and that is their right. If Georgia politicians want to remove Fani Willis, they will. That's up to them.

There are consequences when politicians--especially prosecutors--decide politics are their priority. Judge McBurney made it abundantly clear in his ruling. Fani Willis has only herself to blame for her "horrible optics."

JMO


Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney agreed with Republican state Sen. Burt Jones that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis had a conflict of interest because she hosted a fundraiser last month for Jones’ Democratic opponent in November’s election for lieutenant governor. McBurney said during a hearing last week that Willis’ decision to host the fundraiser was “a ‘What are you thinking?’” moment with “horrible” optics.
 
ETA: Anyone else feel like coming to the Trump threads is a little like going through the looking glass? I can't think of another case I've followed here that's been like that.

I would liken it to the various “fun house” mirrors that are designed to distort perceptions. I have to work extra hard to keep track of what is real and accurate. The image quickly changes as soon as my (or another poster’s logic) has gotten too close to the truth. It is crazy-making. And that is not an accident.

JMO
 
I don't believe the "needs" of Donald Trump have motivated Georgia politicians to pass any laws. I believe it is their core belief system that motivates them. Georgia voters have elected them and that is their right. If Georgia politicians want to remove Fani Willis, they will. That's up to them.

There are consequences when politicians--especially prosecutors--decide politics are their priority. Judge McBurney made it abundantly clear in his ruling. Fani Willis has only herself to blame for her "horrible optics."

JMO


Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney agreed with Republican state Sen. Burt Jones that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis had a conflict of interest because she hosted a fundraiser last month for Jones’ Democratic opponent in November’s election for lieutenant governor. McBurney said during a hearing last week that Willis’ decision to host the fundraiser was “a ‘What are you thinking?’” moment with “horrible” optics.

From your link, just to complete the picture:

The judge’s decision disqualifying Willis from questioning Jones likely has no real bearing on the future of Willis’ overarching investigation into what she has called “a multi-state, coordinated plan” by Trump’s campaign to influence the results of the 2020 election. But it served as a rebuke of Willis and provided ammunition to her critics who have accused her of pursuing a politically motivated case.

 
His supporters believe anything he says and repeat it uncritically. They don’t seem to understand the separation of powers and that having strongmen that brag about eliminating DA’s who don’t carry their political water is anti-American. They don’t understand the rule of law and don’t share American ideals of fair play and peaceful sharing of power. JMO.

VERY well said!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
123
Guests online
1,585
Total visitors
1,708

Forum statistics

Threads
605,831
Messages
18,193,144
Members
233,580
Latest member
Bob84999381
Back
Top