Fani Willis asks for a restraining order from Wade's Wife!

I didn't think the law, explained in granular detail, here's a snippet......... https://www.justsecurity.org/91368/why-fani-willis-is-not-disqualified-under-georgia-law/

The unifying principle in the Georgia disqualification cases, including in Judge McBurney’s prior opinion in this case, is that a conflict of interest warranting prosecutorial disqualification is present when, and only when, the factual circumstances indicate the prosecutor may seek a conviction or otherwise treat a defendant through improper means or with an improper purpose. The Supreme Court has explained that “[t]he responsibility of a public prosecutor differs from that of the usual advocate; his duty is to seek justice, not merely to convict.” Young v. United States ex rel. Vuitton et Fils S.A., 481 U.S. 787, 803 (1987) (quoting Ethical Consideration (EC) 7-13 of Canon 7 of the American Bar Association (ABA) Model Code of Professional Responsibility (1982)). As the American Bar Association elaborates, a “prosecutor has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of an advocate. This responsibility carries with it specific obligations to see that the defendant is accorded procedural justice, that guilt is decided upon the basis of sufficient evidence, and that special precautions are taken to prevent and to rectify the conviction of innocent persons.” Model Rules of Prof’l Conduct r. 3.8 cmt. 1 (Am. Bar. Ass’n 2015). See also Young, 481 U.S. at 804 (stating that prosecutors are “appointed solely to pursue the public interest in vindication of the court’s authority”); Town of Newton v. Rumery, 480 U.S. 386, 395 n.5 (1987); Marshall v. Jerrico, Inc., 446 U.S. 238, 249 (1980).

...........would be convincing for you. But it should be convincing for the judge. You know, someone who matters.

 

Why do you still think Fatty and Wade having sex is the only thing at issue?...lol

 

It sure ain't looking good...lol

https://www.newsweek.com/fani-willis-georgia-ethics-complaint-wade-1864768

 

Because of the authoritative opinions of the lawyers I have read. One of which was the chief ethics lawyer in the Bush admin., so a Repub.

And this guy........Ambassador Norman Eisen (ret.) (@NormEisen) served as special counsel to the House Judiciary Committee majority during the impeachment proceedings and trial of President Donald J. Trump in 2019 to 2020. Eisen was the U.S. Ambassador to the Czech Republic from 2011 to 2014. From January 2009 to January 2011, Eisen worked in the White House as special counsel and special assistant to the president for ethics and government reform. Eisen received his J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1991 and his B.A. from Brown University in 1985, both with honors.

And this woman...Joyce White Vance (@JoyceWhiteVance) is a Distinguished Professor of the Practice of Law at the University of Alabama School of Law. She served as the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama from 2009 to 2017. She was nominated for that position by President Barack Obama in May of 2009 and unanimously confirmed by the Senate in August of 2009. Professor Vance served on the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee and was the Co-Chair of its Criminal Practice Subcommittee. As U.S. Attorney, she was responsible for overseeing all federal criminal investigations and prosecutions in north Alabama, including matters involving civil rights, national security, cybercrime, public corruption, health care and corporate fraud, violent crime and drug trafficking. She was also responsible for affirmative and defensive civil litigation on behalf of the government and for all federal criminal and civil appeals.

 

Trump has managed to transform "opinion pieces from anti-Trump political lobbyists" into free ads for his campaign.
When will they ever learn?

 

What else is there? Surely not Trump's meritorious defenses....

 

He's sure to get the Independents on is side!

 

The felonies that Fatty Willis has committed.

 

There's more to it than who she's ****ing.

 

Once again you've come to a conclusion regarding her guilt even before the hearing has been held. The double standard you apply to her as compared to Trump's actual indictments (with supporting evidence) is glaring.

 

So you keep saying. Pardon me if I align my views with accomplished attorneys with expertise in the matter, not you.

 

Her guilt has been proven. It's documented.

Spare us the righteous indignation, because you never waited for an indictment to declare Trump guilty...lol

 

We're already aware of your confirmation bias... lol

 

Trump will attract support across the spectrum if he can offer credible proposals for sweeping justice system reform.

“29% of people surveyed think the system needs “a complete overhaul,” 40% say “major changes” must be made, 25% think the system requires “minor changes,” while only a meager 5% believe changes are unnecessary, according to a poll of 1,301 from Associated Press and the National Opinion Research Center, or NORC, at the University of Chicago released Tuesday.”
FORBES BUSINESS, A Whopping 95% Of Americans Polled Support Criminal Justice Reform, By Carlie Porterfield, Jun 23, 2020.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlie...icans-polled-support-criminal-justice-reform/

Fortunately for the DP, the RP and DJT are probably too overconfident to offer any significant positive reasons to vote for them.

 

I don't think this snippet says what you think it does. McBurney is not the judge on this case. His prior ruling was regarding Trump trying to get Fani disqualified before an indictment was even made and before obvious ethics violations were uncovered. You're being misled into believing something based on incomplete misinformation by highly partisan political lobbyists who are literally making money trying to keep Trump off the ballot in numerous states. Why are you citing George Soros-funded blogs anyway? It's difficult for people to take your positions seriously when you're trying to support it by partisan hacks who are using George Soros to distribute their misinformation.

There are real sources from legitimate attorneys with a neutral interest in this case. They have a range of valid opinions. Find them. Stop hunting for the most partisan opinion blogs telling you what you want to hear. That doesn't work when you distribute it to people who aren't looking to be gullible to their propaganda.

 

By "accomplished," you mean their articles on this subject were only worthy of print through George Soros-funded blogs, and nobody in the legitimate left-wing media was willing to publish them?

 

Accusing the legal experts I cited of bias, because you have no other recourse, is a poor substitute for a factual refutation of the case law they referenced.

The unifying principle in the Georgia disqualification cases, including in Judge McBurney’s prior opinion in this case, is that a conflict of interest warranting prosecutorial disqualification is present when, and only when, the factual circumstances indicate the prosecutor may seek a conviction or otherwise treat a defendant through improper means or with an improper purpose.

Under Georgia law, “[t]here are two generally recognized grounds for disqualification of a prosecuting attorney. The first such ground is based on a conflict of interest, and the second ground has been described as ‘forensic misconduct.'” Williams v. State, 258 Ga. 305, 314, 369 S.E.2d 232, 238 (198. There is no allegation of “forensic misconduct” in this prosecution.

The attorney's I cited have precedent, GA statutes, and the expertise to apply them on their side. You have character assassination, which is the Trumpian playbook, on yours. You've brought a squirt gun to a knife fight.

 

Disparaging a source in the absence of an ability to contest the substance of the argument made makes you look weak and silly.

The Alleged Romantic Relationship Between Willis and Wade

Georgia courts have resoundingly rejected romantic relationships between attorneys as a basis for prosecutorial disqualification. “[T]here is no per se rule of disqualification based on marital status.” Jones v. Jones, 258 Ga. 353, 354–55 (198; see also Blumenfeld v. Borenstein, 247 Ga. 406, 408, 276 S.E.2d 607, 609 (1981) (“Absent a showing that special circumstances exist which prevent the adequate representation of the client, disqualification based solely on marital status is not justified.”). The Georgia Supreme Court has explained that even married attorneys on opposing sides of litigation do not suffer from a conflict of interest. See Jones, 258 Ga. at 354–355 (“We have found no authority, and none has been cited to us, for the proposition that married lawyers who are involved in active litigation on opposing sides of a case must be disqualified.”). Georgia courts have explained that, “[w]hile we cannot disagree with the proposition that the marital relationship may be the most intimate relationship of a person’s life, it does not follow that professional people allow this intimacy to interfere with professional obligations.” Ventura, 346 Ga. App. at 311, 816 S.E.2d at 154. The opportunity for conflict and potential impropriety between spouses on opposing sides of litigation are greater than those on the same side of a case, working toward the same outcome. Accordingly, there is no plausible argument that non-married attorneys in a romantic relationship who serve together as prosecutors in a case create a conflict of interest for the defendant.

 

Like what?

 

List them.

 

Bribery, fraud, theft, witness intimidation, abuse of office and we can add obstruction of justice to the list soon.

 

Whoa. It looks like you got her by the short and curlies! Nice sources.

 

If you only had the evidence.

 

Trump is gaslighting us.

 

Oh, there's evidence...lol

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fani-w...n-county-district-attorney-flights-documents/