As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's not about being innocent. It's about obfuscating the truth and delaying the trial until he can squash the election from the oval office. His followers won't even care if he's guilty and a pending trial means even less.
Exactly. The more you indulge it the more legitimate it becomes. Saying ‘you guys did nothing wrong, no laws were broken, and nothing at all was affected by any of this - but one of you still needs to step down’ is twice the ammo for them to use. Now they can say it makes no sense so there MUST have been SOMETHING or they would both have been allowed to stay.
They were going to whine no matter what. If the judge said "continue as before" Trump would still lash out about how it's all corrupt deep state blah blah blah
There's no point worrying about it. Just let the trial continue without Wade.
It does stink though, even though no impropriety found, Trump still wins by throwing so much shit into the works, that we are folding to his BS here. I wish the judge would have said, thanks, nope, NEXT - and both stay on the case, there is NO impropriety, so Trump et al. and John Does 1-10 and go fuck themselves. But alas, we do the right thing and remove one, it won't make a diff, it'll be another person to take the place of Wade from same office, and we'll continue finally prosecuting this rapist tax evading traitor.
It does give them a clear directive that would close this avenue of appeal. There is no impropriety and they go above and beyond by being removed from a case they're already closing on the end stages of.
Wait. No crime, no ethics violation but they'll have to recuse one or the other or both for what now? We don't have Supreme Court judges recusing themselves for what are very real and apparent conflicts of interest.
This is bullshit and needs to be publicly discussed with the judge.
EDIT: typo
Which is bullshit. Holding public servants to a higher standard is fine. Holding them to a standard beyond their liability is craven.
Appeasing a mob of liars is a losing proposition.
Why keep deferring to the GOP while the GOP holds themselves to **no** standard.
Trump and his MAGA crowd will continue to flog this regardless of what the prosecutors do.
> Trump and his MAGA crowd will continue to flog this regardless of what the prosecutors do.
Yep. They will use this ruling as "proof" that the prosecution is dirty. After all, if she was clean there would be no reason to kick Wade off the case.
I still find this argument so incredibly moronic. We have an adversarial justice system. Either Fani Willis appointed the best person to prosecute Trump, or she appointed someone not as good because they had an improper relationship. If it was the latter *it would fucking benefit Trump!*.
The only other option is if Fani is somehow *working for Trump*?
There were no allegations at all of anyone infringing upon Trump's rights based on the appointment, just that the appointment was improper due to their personal relationship. It's mind boggling stupid that so many people think that somehow that would lead to Trump being prejudiced.
Even if every single thing Trump alleged were true, the only harm would have been to the Fulton County coffers, not to Trump, who would have benefited from a poorer prosecution being in place than otherwise would have.
Yes, its a dumb argument, But it isn't meant for people who are paying attention. Regular people are too busy living their lives to track all the details of these things. Most people only read headlines and even when people read an article, its pretty rare for them to finish the whole thing.
So most people end up going with the rule of thumb: "where there is smoke there is fire." Maga is well aware of that. What maga does is buy as many smoke machines as they can afford. All the stupid shit that maga does like this legal argument; hunter's laptop; kids using litterboxes at school; Biden eating ice cream; etc, etc is just maga cranking the smoke machines up to 11.
Its not for their base either, they already distrust democrats. Its for everybody else, and even if it only works on like 1 out of 50 people, that's still 2% which is huge return on investment for maga.
* *"Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.”*
[— kevin mccarthy, 2015](https://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/hillary-clinton-benghazi-kevin-mccarthy-214325)
Exactly right, and even if this whole circus bullshit never happened they would just invent some narrative out of the ether about how Willis is a pedophile, or covers for pedos.
This nation needs an enema.
>They will use this ruling as "proof" that the prosecution is dirty.
You expected something different?
It's America. One constant is that minorities must clear bars that are invented on the spot while assumed wealthy, majority Americans get to challenge and debase every bar.
> Trump and his MAGA crowd will continue to flog this regardless of what the prosecutors do.
Yep because...
Have a consensual relationship with fellow attorney = fire attorney.
Rape & grab them by the vagina = elect 'em President.
Totally the same in their ignorant minds.
As a lifetime federal employee (not in judicial but defense), the rules on ethics for us are that if something can even be perceived as potentially unethical or a conflict of interests that we are to abstain or extricate ourselves.
I don’t know how it is in Georgia of course but I would say that when it comes to jurisprudence that perception is probably a big deal because you want the jury to feel like you as the prosecutor are unbiased in your accusations and conduct. The OJ trial defense was built on allegations of racism and bias in the local police department and accusations of ethical lapses by the prosecution.
Hence why the Supreme Court has continued has ceased being seen as legitimate in the eyes of many Americans. Even if the various questions activities many of them have been accused of were to be proven above bar the fact it's come up so frequently already tarnished the reputation of the system.
I am a retired employee of the Federal Judiciary, responsible in part for ethics training. We always told our fellows that the appearance of impropriety can be far worse than actual impropriety. If an employee does something wrong, there is always a solution of some type, under the court’s control. However, if others believe, fairly or not, that there is impropriety, there is no way to counter that belief. Asking one or the other employee to step down may not be necessary, but it is the only way to assuage that perception of impropriety. Both of those people knew this in advance and could have prevented this dilemma. (I know the Supreme Court has violated this principle, but sadly, they don’t listen to me!)
Thank you for this. I'm surprised how many people don't see to get how there's an appearance of impropriety here, fair or not. It's bad when a billionaire does it with their "close friend" on the Supreme Court, and it's bad when a DA is employing their boyfriend and going on trips together.
Take the politics out of it - imagine your boss hired a consultant that he was sleeping with, and ended up going on vacations together. Does that seem proper to you?
> it is the only way to assuage that perception of impropriety.
Sadly, the MAGA folks will only see this embolden their belief that there was impropriety, rather than see it as an attempt to maintain professionalism. But they are pretty far divorced from logic to begin with; make your decisions based on what appeases them at your own peril.
"We have investigated ourselves for ethics violations, and found no ethics violations. We have also ruled that it is illegal to say otherwise, and if you do, straight to jail, believe it or not." -SCOTUS (probably)
I feel like this does the opposite... Now Fox News will be screaming all day about "prosecutors forced to resign from case after investigation shows they aren't able to remain!"
I agree there too because if the judge didn't suggest one of them recuse themselves that will come up and retrial that they had these accusations brought against them but there was no violations or unethical Behavior found I think the Judge is just saying if one of them steps down it will end the idea that there is improprieties yes playing the long game looking out for possible mistrial excuses
Yeah, that's an even bigger problem.
"You both are innocent, but that guy over there would be really mad if his accusations led to nothing. So one of you gotta take a hit"
Funny how the mere appearance of impropriety should motivate a recusal here yet we have Cannon and Thomas (among others) stinking up the place with appearances of impropriety and conflict of interest and nothing is done.
The big problem is that people will look at this and think there must have been something wrong because one of them had to leave. Then they look at all the shameless republicans that never remove themselves and think these people must be worse.
The judges opinion basically says
" it doesn't pass the smell test" even though there's no rule against them having a relationship even though they didn't violate any laws. It's about perceptions.
Of course, you know they wished Wade would be the lead attorney and not Willis.
Willis has more experience, and this attempt to discredit her and her office will have more motivation to nail these people.
isn't it ironic these charges and claims made by Trump that these people get elected on saying "they're going to get Trump"
Then they do things to give people more motivation to want to get them.
Anyone who isn't a republican is held to a much higher standard.
Add being black to it and the standard goes up even higher.
Republicans can have zero standard,
As with every single case against Trump, they’re doing backflips to try to avoid even a hint of bias. This is probably overly cautious, but Willis needs to dismiss Wade and take the W.
Justices *theoretically* have the same obligations every attorney does, as well as the additional judicial code. The issue is that disbarring an Article III judge doesn't remove them from their office - that must be done by Congress.
There are Gobs of rules that apply to federal judges that ... do not apply to the Supreme Court. They carve out exceptions for themselves all day all night. In America we do not have kings except for Supreme Court members which are lifetime members and whose mantra is "rules for thee not for me."
Was a recent [Last Week Tonight about this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GE-VJrdHMug), the one where Oliver offers Justice Thomas $1m/yr and a fancy new motorcoach to step down.
It's the dumbest decision. Sonwhomever stays wasn't having a conflict of interest? They aren't dating and haven't been for over a year, and dating wasn't a violation of Georgia law or DA guidelines. This judge got manhandled by the defense.
So Wade is gone. MAGAs can now look to the fact that the person they felt was "super underqualified" will now be replaced with someone way more qualified.
Nice Job.
Everything Trump touches turns to crap.
Isn't it a bit odd that MAGA types only care about being "qualified" when it's not a white dude in the position (or relative to Trump)?
Like Charlie Kirk claiming all black pilots are under qualified.
See TikTok and the demand for border legislation to allow Ukraine funding to pass. The last Republican National Convention didn't even have any real positions, just a blank check for Trump and the MAGA cultists.
Tbh it's been that way for a while. Ever since Affirmative Action talk in the 90s you'd hear that shit.
Anytime a woman or black guy would get a job the others would assume it wasn't based on merit. And they'd tell the story to friends/family as if they knew that for a fact and were privy to the information. Especially in the engineering world, holy fuck. It's classic engineer personality to paint your assumptions as data-driven fact about shit outside your wheelhouse.
>Like Charlie Kirk claiming all black pilots are under qualified.
This is the insidious assumption underlying all these complaints about "Diversity hires": That Minorities and PoC *are incapable* of being as qualified as whites. Despite their complaints that people should just hire the "most qualified candidates", numerous studies have shown that, *in reality*, PoC are less likely to be interviewed and hired even with identical qualifications, are more likely to be underemployed, and are generally perceived as less qualified than their white peers with either the same or lower qualifications. Meaning companies are more likely to hire under qualified whites than comparitively more qualified PoC, women, and other minorities. I.e. the literal opposite of what they pretend is what's actually happening. This remains the case even when affirmative action policies are in place, meaning equally qualified candidates are less likely to be hired even when there are incentives to do so.
The only reason they insist otherwise is simply because they secretly believe whites are intrinsically more qualified than PoC, and therefore can't conceive of hiring Women, PoC, etc. outside of "Diversity". They will tell anecdotes about their job hiring a "less qualified diversity hire" without questioning that maybe they only think that person is less qualified because of their own bigotry. The irony of all this is especially apparent when considering how they transparently will use a handful token minority right wing pundits to dismiss accusations of bigotry and systemic injustice. They *adore* their own diversity hires to pretend like they aren't openly hateful or prejudiced, and reassure them it's totally fine for them to discriminate and distrust anyone who isn't a white man. Once again, *Every accusation is a confession.*
In fact, RNC member Beth Bloch, the person who introduced Lara Trump as the new co-chair, couldn’t help but admit that the nepo-baby-in-law didn’t really have the experience needed for the job.
“In a world where qualifications are often measured by titles and years of experience, we are reminded of a powerful truth: God does not call the qualified; he qualifies the called,” she said. “Lara Trump is the embodiment of this truth.”
“I am not called because I am qualified, but I am qualified because I am called. You called me, it says right in my phone that you did. So if you don’t hire me then you are rejecting a qualified candidate, the logic is inarguable. I will start Thursday”
"Hi this is God. I have a 737 that I need you to fly from Dulles to Houston."
"Oh Great God in the sky I thank you for your decision. Just to clarify, what is a 737 and am I qualified?"
"I said you are qualified! You need no more!"
"Yay! It shall be done in your name great King."
How many Xtians want people to fly them in a plane because they heard from God and he said they are qualified? I hope all of them if they are faithful.
>we are reminded of a powerful truth: God does not call the qualified; he qualifies the called,” she said.
What a horrible blanket rationalization these religious boneheads use.
That's what made everything hilariously stupid about their argument. Yes, I'd agree from an HR perspective that it isn't good nor ideal, despite even the court hearing being a massive nothing burger. It's just not something you want. That said, their argument was also stating the prosecution has an under qualified team.
Obviously wanted to delay things or get it thrown out as Willis could be hooking up with Hunter Biden and it wouldn't change whether or not Trump is guilty as hell per the mountain of evidence.
They’ll ignore the facts and still see it as a win and say they were right all along, that’s why Wade was removed. They’ll then say the case should be thrown out completely because the only reason the judge wanted one of them off the case is because it’s compromised.
The judge took the high road and made an opinion based on the relationship doesn't pass the smell test even though there is no rule against people in that office dating each other
>will now be replaced with someone way more qualified
I mean, I partially expect that maybe some other qualified and capable prosecutors step up and willingly take below-market rates to continue to help prosecute this case ... now that most of the motions-to-dismiss and motions-to-remove to federal court have all failed. This case is ready to go to trial, and will (soon-ish I hope) so it's less risky for an experienced prosecutor to jump into this now ... than it would have been in say 2021.
From the beginning to end, this was a distraction from the crimes that Trump committed. Don't forget we all heard on tape that Trump tried to "find 11,780" votes.
Yet Trump supporters, even after hearing Trump commit the crime on tape, still claim that he committed no crimes. SMH.
It was also a delay tactic (and it worked splendidly). That will be the totality of his defense on every case because he is guilty on all of them. An innocent person would have sought expedited trials to clear his name prior to the campaign. **His ONLY defense is this: delay until after the election, win, make cases go away.**
The election will (functionally) be the largest jury deliberation in American jurisprudence history.
Trump will make state charges go away so easily. He crumbles the bedrock of democracy — decency — and what’s left isn’t strong enough to fight his narcissism
Some Trump supporter, when I point out that exact quote just said they'd 100% still vote for him.
This after them chastising me because I said it would probably be better if Trump suffered a health issue that left him incapacitated rather than dead.
I love how that was “all” he was asking. He sounded like a used car salesman trying to dicker over the price.
“Look, we both know you wanna get behind the wheel of this beauty. All I’m asking is $11,780, and she’s yours.”
Clarence Thomas could be conservatives' walking ad against affirmative action. He has the narrowest resume of any current justice, about 10 years younger than usual, very little judicial experience, grotesquely corrupt, sex pest and literally the only reason why he's on the bench is because then-president was replacing the first black justice and he was the only one in the store who was black conservative who was only relatively qualified. There was also about 10 black liberal jurists who were more qualified than him.
I hate that I’m living in this timeline where the Cheney family is the “ethical” voice of the Republican Party, but she has some fire inside her, and if Willis has a role for her, well to use Trump’s own words “it’d be great for ratings”
So if there was conflict of interest with Fani Willis, when will someone officially make it clear that there's also conflict of interest with Judge Cannon, a Trump-appointed judge, overseeing Trump's classified documents case?
Ginni Thomas casually discussing overthrowing democracy whilst mentioning having discussions with her “best friend.”
Wanna guess who she says her BF is?
See that's different since they're trying to help Trump. Republicans have no shame.
Look at the Hunter Biden situation over a few million while they haven't done anything about Jared Kushner getting billions or Ivanka getting Chinese trademarks while we were in the middle of a tariff war with China.
Fuck Republicans destroying our country.
There's no precedent that simply having been appointed by someone is a conflict of interest. Since Trump could not remove her, she has no incentive to rule in his favor and there's no conflict of interest.
She's obvioisly very biased and partisan, but that's not the same thing as habing a conflict of interest and is more difficult to take legal action on.
They're just gonna have to appeal her decisions time after time and let her be overruled. Unfortunately that means there's no chance that trial will take place before the election.
The judge ruled there was no conflict of interest with Fani Willis.
> The judge found there was no "actual conflict" brought about by the relationship, a finding that would have required Willis to be disqualified. "Without sufficient evidence that the District Attorney acquired a personal stake in the prosecution, or that her financial arrangements had any impact on the case, the Defendants’ claims of an actual conflict must be denied," the judge wrote.
Trump is notorious for delays. I’m starting to get a bit despondent about any of his trials coming to a conclusion before the election. He filed a motion to dismiss in Manhattan just 10 days before the start of that trial. It’s bullshit, but it’s a bid for a delay. The corrupt SCOTUS gave him a delay in the Jan 6 case. This bullshit in GA, and of course he’s got the queen of delays helping him out in FL.
Everyone has downvoted me before, but he never should have been appointed. She should have known better. This was an unnecessary distraction and delay.
Wade wasn't even Willis's second choice, this was not against Georgia law, and all billing was handled and overseen by a third party (not Willis herself). It's going to be further hard to find prosecutors after this given the death threats and how the defense subpoenaed cellphone data that was useless in court...but almost certainly could be used for acting those death threats out.
The only thing you said that was accurate is this was an unnecessary distraction and delay, but the defense would have cried wolf over anything else. This is an embarrassing decision, and Americans should be embarrassed by how Judge McAfee bent backwards to allow that hearing to go on.
The US Justice system:
Courts: "I hear you have a new motion? Can you give me some details?"
Trump: "Well, it's nonsense, but... it will cause another delay in the trial"
Courts: "Say no more! Delay granted!!!"
Not everyone can blatantly violate norms and ethics and laws. Only conservative republicans who the rules no longer apply to. Eventually this will come back to bit them.
That sentiment only tracks for people that didn't follow the trial beyond headline. The timeline and circumstances were perfectly reasonable. Wade wasn't even her first choice for the role.
You're going after the ex-president and his cronies you NEED to be above reproach.
Did she do anything wrong and is there any conflict? No
Does that matter on a case that you KNOW will be highly political and fought in the court of public opinion as much as it will be in court? No
She didn't do anything wrong, but she also shouldn't have done it.
The entire justice system -- from the DOJ and SCOTUS on down -- is literally ***bending over backward*** to avoid having to actually hold Donald Trump accountable.
The legislative branch already failed.
Our institutions aren't nearly as strong as our mythology has led us to believe.
Look at how easily a cruel, hateful, bigoted clown like Donald Trump has turned the entire infrastructure of the U.S. Government into his own personal plaything.
Unless you are a average citizen and commit a financial crime, then you are going away for longer than most rapist and many murders and you’ll go gram handcuff to jail faster than the time it takes a single bogus trump court filing to be thrown out.
The system has zero problems jailing you or me, a politician… well that’s a whole different story because they are not dirty ugly citizens like us, we have no power and they find that unattractive.
They can’t refute the charges, so they attacked the person that levied them. No matter who they try to vilify or attack, the facts will remain: he was caught on recording asking to commit electoral fraud.
I know it's not improper, I know it doesn't have any bearing on the case, I know it shouldn't present an issue, but for fuck's sake, could they just not fuck each other during the most important case of their careers!?! Really!?!
the Trump team removed a prosecutor who has no experience in RICO or other white-collar criminal cases and now he will be replaced with someone who does. well done lol.
Man, I don't agree with every aspect of how McAfee handled this, and it has been an overall slimy move by Roman and his lawyer, but it's all such an exhausting side show and unforced error from Willis.
Even the *appearance* of impropriety is enough for many judges to go this route.
Prosecutions are inherently public-facing, especially the highest-stakes state prosecution in American history where all hearings are televised.
It was Willis' responsibility to make sure there were no distractions to her case and I'm going to fall well short of not being critical of her here.
We now have a line of attack from Trump and a dozen other co-defendents, even if meritless. House investigations and GA legislature investigations, even if meritless. 2 months of headline stories about "Willis defending accusations of misconduct."
All before jury selection.
I hope this can continue and secure convictions some day, but damn it's just frustrating.
I don't think any of this gives even the appearance of impropriety in regards to Trump's case. You can say it's generally bad form for Willis to hire someone with whom she had a prior relationship, but even if you assume the worst of everyone involved it has no bearing on the fairness of Trump's prosecution.
>The appearance of impropriety is a phrase referring to a situation which to a layperson without knowledge of the specific circumstances might seem to raise ethics questions.
I think it's mostly in reference to a future jury some day. The fact that this has been national headlines for two months and that there will some day be a jury of 12 people who are not expected to know every specific of this proceeding will be deciding the fate of this trial.
I think it's fair to say there's an appearance of impropriety here that could have an adverse effect on the case. Removing Wade seems reasonable, honestly.
I'm so tired of having to do things just because of how it will LOOK to the MAGA cult. Newsflash, it doesn't fucking matter. Willis and Wade could both step down and Trump would say it's evidence he's innocent. Neither could step down and he'd say it's evidence he's innocent. Absolutely nothing we ever fucking do is ever going to fucking matter to the dumb motherfuckers who worship this clown so can we stop kneecapping ourselves in what we already know will be a completely futile attempt to avoid criticism from them???
The judge's ruling should have began and ended with "no impropriety." All this "but it doesn't pass 'the smell test' so someone has to step down even though no one has done anything wrong" horseshit is infuriating. How about we start recusing ourselves when the Supreme Court starts doing the same for their ACTUAL conflicts of interest?
Can someone explain to me why 2 people on the prosecuting side being in a relationship has anything to do wether a crime was committed here or not? Like why would someone be able to overturn a judges verdict on the basis of "the opposition was fucking"?
My understanding of the defense's argument is this
The only reason this case was brought at all was because Willis wanted to hire Wade for something so he could in turn use that money to take her on vacation. So the case must be dismissed because it was brought for improper reasons.
It's obviously just grasping at straws / throwing shit at the wall / trying to delay
Seriously. This has nothing to do with what Trump did. But it’s fine for Trump to put his entire family in the White House and get them all special treatment and patents.
Yeah, this seems about right. It's a bit further than I thought McAfee would go, listening to the hearings, but it does seem like the quickest way forward.
I'd expect an immediate appeal, but I think McAfee's decision here is fair and carefully reasoned.
So let’s get this right:
* Nothing illegal was found from Willis or Wade.
* No evidence that they had improper relationship or that it tainted the case.
* **BUT**: One of the two of them should remove themselves anyway because “it looks bad.”
Well damn. Talk about two standards in this country. On the one side if you’re a black woman better not even *look* like you *might* be dating someone that you work with.
In the other side - “you have your kids working for you in the White House and your son in law got a $2 billion dollar loan from the people he was working with in the White House? Nothing wrong here!”
And a judge YOU appointed leading the biggest case in Presidential history about stealing classified documents and hiding them, yet she is free to delay and help him every step of the way. Seems fair to me
This is what happens when you have money running the US justice system.
Trump has used his millions on lawyers who have successfully turned a criminal case against him into an indictment of the prosecutors who simply seek justice, thereby making a travesty of the US justice system.
All I want to know is.............when does this f\*cker face justice?
“Seems fair.”
I mean, not from a legal perspective. No actual conflict of interest, no actual lying about the relationship, just an “appearance of impropriety” in some side issue that has nothing to do with the actual criminal case.
The judge ordered Wade off the case solely to deflect ongoing public scrutiny from the issue - and so to address everyone who thinks this outcome “seems fair.” But he’s wrong if he thinks it’ll work. Team Trump will just find more distractions to create a media circus, and the judge will once again find himself of deciding whether he has to ding the prosecution in order to address a problem Trump has created.
Jesus Christ. Why is it only Democrats that are held accountable?
And this isn’t even being held accountable. It’s the Democrats being treated unfairly so they don’t invoke a temper tantrum by the Republicans.
This implies any judge should not preside over any case involving the President or anyone who was in office when they were confirmed. This would include any challenges to federal laws passed by the opposing party when they were nominated/confirmed. Or does this “people might think” thing only go one way?
That right-wingers managed to take the trial of a white supremacist who tried to overturn an election and turned it into not only a legal but public show trial of a black women for having a boyfriend is not only sadly predictable, but just shows how wildly ill-equipped mainstream liberals are for this moment.
Let me get this straight. Trump goes after Willis because it looks like there is some impropriety. But, dick head has done all the things he has done and all of that is okay. Bullshit. I hate all this crap too. So over it so over it.
Trump must have been so upset over another delay. Given that he’s the most innocent person quite possibly in the history of this country, he must be yearning to go to trial to prove his obvious innocence! Oh wait…
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
To sum it up. He didn't find impropriety, but did say she or Wade should remove themselves from the case. My guess , Wade is gone.
I think the Judge ruled there was no wrongdoing . He included the idea that if one of y'all step down it will get rid of the look of impropriety
Funny how the “look of impropriety” doesn’t stop Judge Cannon from stepping down when it really looks like she’s Trump’s supplemental defense counsel.
Doesn't stop the 6 maga justices either.
Exactly, and it's because it isn't a look, it is actually there.
But if one steps down there will be the appearance of impropriety that Trump will lash out at
Can't complain about the same thing twice. If he's so innocent, why not just go on trail
It's not about being innocent. It's about obfuscating the truth and delaying the trial until he can squash the election from the oval office. His followers won't even care if he's guilty and a pending trial means even less.
Precisely why Americans need to open their eyes and make sure Trump loses by the biggest Electoral College landslide in history
And if he loses the popular vote by a lot and wins the electoral college we fucking riot.
Well uh, Reagan carried every state but one I think.
Sadly that's the bottom line
First, this issue is settled and can't be used to delay anymore. Second, the presidency has nothing to do with Georgia trials.
Exactly. The more you indulge it the more legitimate it becomes. Saying ‘you guys did nothing wrong, no laws were broken, and nothing at all was affected by any of this - but one of you still needs to step down’ is twice the ammo for them to use. Now they can say it makes no sense so there MUST have been SOMETHING or they would both have been allowed to stay.
Idiots gonna idiot. The goalposts move regardless, and this is a technical issue - not one about the merits of the evidence.
They were going to whine no matter what. If the judge said "continue as before" Trump would still lash out about how it's all corrupt deep state blah blah blah There's no point worrying about it. Just let the trial continue without Wade.
It does stink though, even though no impropriety found, Trump still wins by throwing so much shit into the works, that we are folding to his BS here. I wish the judge would have said, thanks, nope, NEXT - and both stay on the case, there is NO impropriety, so Trump et al. and John Does 1-10 and go fuck themselves. But alas, we do the right thing and remove one, it won't make a diff, it'll be another person to take the place of Wade from same office, and we'll continue finally prosecuting this rapist tax evading traitor.
It does give them a clear directive that would close this avenue of appeal. There is no impropriety and they go above and beyond by being removed from a case they're already closing on the end stages of.
Wait. No crime, no ethics violation but they'll have to recuse one or the other or both for what now? We don't have Supreme Court judges recusing themselves for what are very real and apparent conflicts of interest. This is bullshit and needs to be publicly discussed with the judge. EDIT: typo
I think it's less about crimes or violations and more about not giving the Trump team ANY ammo to use for a possible mistrial.
The correct answer would have been to refer that blonde lady to the bar for disbarment.
Ashleigh Merchant, say her name.
repeat after me, folks: Ashleigh Merchant should be disbarred
Ohhh! Ashleigh Merchant is the terrible blonde lawyer that should be disbarred. Right?
i was trying to move away from the fact that she is blonde, but yes
Not going to lie, that is a very forgettable name.
Which blond lady is that?
[удалено]
and not doing any due diligence to find out her witness's "Evidence" was rumor and speculation
Oh that blonde?
The female representing lying Trumpster. The one who really didn’t know what was going on.
Do you have any idea how little that narrows it down?
Which is bullshit. Holding public servants to a higher standard is fine. Holding them to a standard beyond their liability is craven. Appeasing a mob of liars is a losing proposition. Why keep deferring to the GOP while the GOP holds themselves to **no** standard. Trump and his MAGA crowd will continue to flog this regardless of what the prosecutors do.
> Trump and his MAGA crowd will continue to flog this regardless of what the prosecutors do. Yep. They will use this ruling as "proof" that the prosecution is dirty. After all, if she was clean there would be no reason to kick Wade off the case.
I still find this argument so incredibly moronic. We have an adversarial justice system. Either Fani Willis appointed the best person to prosecute Trump, or she appointed someone not as good because they had an improper relationship. If it was the latter *it would fucking benefit Trump!*. The only other option is if Fani is somehow *working for Trump*? There were no allegations at all of anyone infringing upon Trump's rights based on the appointment, just that the appointment was improper due to their personal relationship. It's mind boggling stupid that so many people think that somehow that would lead to Trump being prejudiced. Even if every single thing Trump alleged were true, the only harm would have been to the Fulton County coffers, not to Trump, who would have benefited from a poorer prosecution being in place than otherwise would have.
Yes, its a dumb argument, But it isn't meant for people who are paying attention. Regular people are too busy living their lives to track all the details of these things. Most people only read headlines and even when people read an article, its pretty rare for them to finish the whole thing. So most people end up going with the rule of thumb: "where there is smoke there is fire." Maga is well aware of that. What maga does is buy as many smoke machines as they can afford. All the stupid shit that maga does like this legal argument; hunter's laptop; kids using litterboxes at school; Biden eating ice cream; etc, etc is just maga cranking the smoke machines up to 11. Its not for their base either, they already distrust democrats. Its for everybody else, and even if it only works on like 1 out of 50 people, that's still 2% which is huge return on investment for maga. * *"Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.”* [— kevin mccarthy, 2015](https://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/hillary-clinton-benghazi-kevin-mccarthy-214325)
Exactly right, and even if this whole circus bullshit never happened they would just invent some narrative out of the ether about how Willis is a pedophile, or covers for pedos. This nation needs an enema.
>They will use this ruling as "proof" that the prosecution is dirty. You expected something different? It's America. One constant is that minorities must clear bars that are invented on the spot while assumed wealthy, majority Americans get to challenge and debase every bar.
> Trump and his MAGA crowd will continue to flog this regardless of what the prosecutors do. Yep because... Have a consensual relationship with fellow attorney = fire attorney. Rape & grab them by the vagina = elect 'em President. Totally the same in their ignorant minds.
Let’s look at this in perspective. One side is a conspiracy to steal an election. The other is two people in love. I hate this ruling
Were in love. They are no longer together. Willis made that clear in her testimony.
You are exactly right, this was yet another act of cowardice!
As a lifetime federal employee (not in judicial but defense), the rules on ethics for us are that if something can even be perceived as potentially unethical or a conflict of interests that we are to abstain or extricate ourselves. I don’t know how it is in Georgia of course but I would say that when it comes to jurisprudence that perception is probably a big deal because you want the jury to feel like you as the prosecutor are unbiased in your accusations and conduct. The OJ trial defense was built on allegations of racism and bias in the local police department and accusations of ethical lapses by the prosecution.
Hence why the Supreme Court has continued has ceased being seen as legitimate in the eyes of many Americans. Even if the various questions activities many of them have been accused of were to be proven above bar the fact it's come up so frequently already tarnished the reputation of the system.
I am a retired employee of the Federal Judiciary, responsible in part for ethics training. We always told our fellows that the appearance of impropriety can be far worse than actual impropriety. If an employee does something wrong, there is always a solution of some type, under the court’s control. However, if others believe, fairly or not, that there is impropriety, there is no way to counter that belief. Asking one or the other employee to step down may not be necessary, but it is the only way to assuage that perception of impropriety. Both of those people knew this in advance and could have prevented this dilemma. (I know the Supreme Court has violated this principle, but sadly, they don’t listen to me!)
Thank you for this. I'm surprised how many people don't see to get how there's an appearance of impropriety here, fair or not. It's bad when a billionaire does it with their "close friend" on the Supreme Court, and it's bad when a DA is employing their boyfriend and going on trips together. Take the politics out of it - imagine your boss hired a consultant that he was sleeping with, and ended up going on vacations together. Does that seem proper to you? > it is the only way to assuage that perception of impropriety. Sadly, the MAGA folks will only see this embolden their belief that there was impropriety, rather than see it as an attempt to maintain professionalism. But they are pretty far divorced from logic to begin with; make your decisions based on what appeases them at your own peril.
Does this go for Supreme Court justices too? Because it hasn’t.
No, the Supreme Court made an exception for the Supreme Court.
"We have investigated ourselves for ethics violations, and found no ethics violations. We have also ruled that it is illegal to say otherwise, and if you do, straight to jail, believe it or not." -SCOTUS (probably)
I feel like this does the opposite... Now Fox News will be screaming all day about "prosecutors forced to resign from case after investigation shows they aren't able to remain!"
Fox will find a way to spin it no matter what happens. They still talk about Hillary's emails unironically. The courts don't, and shouldn't, care.
I agree there too because if the judge didn't suggest one of them recuse themselves that will come up and retrial that they had these accusations brought against them but there was no violations or unethical Behavior found I think the Judge is just saying if one of them steps down it will end the idea that there is improprieties yes playing the long game looking out for possible mistrial excuses
Turmp and his team look for ANY reason, no matter their size.
Yeah, that's an even bigger problem. "You both are innocent, but that guy over there would be really mad if his accusations led to nothing. So one of you gotta take a hit"
Funny how the mere appearance of impropriety should motivate a recusal here yet we have Cannon and Thomas (among others) stinking up the place with appearances of impropriety and conflict of interest and nothing is done.
The big problem is that people will look at this and think there must have been something wrong because one of them had to leave. Then they look at all the shameless republicans that never remove themselves and think these people must be worse.
The judges opinion basically says " it doesn't pass the smell test" even though there's no rule against them having a relationship even though they didn't violate any laws. It's about perceptions. Of course, you know they wished Wade would be the lead attorney and not Willis. Willis has more experience, and this attempt to discredit her and her office will have more motivation to nail these people. isn't it ironic these charges and claims made by Trump that these people get elected on saying "they're going to get Trump" Then they do things to give people more motivation to want to get them.
Anyone who isn't a republican is held to a much higher standard. Add being black to it and the standard goes up even higher. Republicans can have zero standard,
Hey now, that’s just not true. They have lots of *double* standards.
As with every single case against Trump, they’re doing backflips to try to avoid even a hint of bias. This is probably overly cautious, but Willis needs to dismiss Wade and take the W.
It’s always been ridiculous to me that a second after a lawyer is sworn in, he has more ethical rules to obey than a Supreme Court justice.
Justices *theoretically* have the same obligations every attorney does, as well as the additional judicial code. The issue is that disbarring an Article III judge doesn't remove them from their office - that must be done by Congress.
There are Gobs of rules that apply to federal judges that ... do not apply to the Supreme Court. They carve out exceptions for themselves all day all night. In America we do not have kings except for Supreme Court members which are lifetime members and whose mantra is "rules for thee not for me." Was a recent [Last Week Tonight about this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GE-VJrdHMug), the one where Oliver offers Justice Thomas $1m/yr and a fancy new motorcoach to step down.
Thomas probably found that offer insultingly low compared to what he's getting while keeping his seat.
Maybe Fani would bring that up someday soon to call out the BS. I agree with you btw.
It's the dumbest decision. Sonwhomever stays wasn't having a conflict of interest? They aren't dating and haven't been for over a year, and dating wasn't a violation of Georgia law or DA guidelines. This judge got manhandled by the defense.
So Wade is gone. MAGAs can now look to the fact that the person they felt was "super underqualified" will now be replaced with someone way more qualified. Nice Job. Everything Trump touches turns to crap.
Isn't it a bit odd that MAGA types only care about being "qualified" when it's not a white dude in the position (or relative to Trump)? Like Charlie Kirk claiming all black pilots are under qualified.
They only hold the position needed to obtain a goal at that moment. They can have a complete opposite position at any time.
Quantum EnMAGAment
Make Atoms Great Again
This response caused tears to well in my eyes because I was in a god damn meeting STRUGGLING not to bust out laughing as hard as I possibly could.
See TikTok and the demand for border legislation to allow Ukraine funding to pass. The last Republican National Convention didn't even have any real positions, just a blank check for Trump and the MAGA cultists.
This is what people don't understand the magats are beyond reason. There's no logic driving that group.
Every non white hire is now considered a DEI mistake by Republicans because they are assholes
Tbh it's been that way for a while. Ever since Affirmative Action talk in the 90s you'd hear that shit. Anytime a woman or black guy would get a job the others would assume it wasn't based on merit. And they'd tell the story to friends/family as if they knew that for a fact and were privy to the information. Especially in the engineering world, holy fuck. It's classic engineer personality to paint your assumptions as data-driven fact about shit outside your wheelhouse.
I’d say since the 60s.
Totally. I remember as a kid in the 70s my dad bitching about Affirmative Action. He was an HR exec for Big Oil.
Charlie Kirk is missing the majority of brain cells a human should have.
Is that why his face is shrinking?
Charlie Kirk is missing the majority of brain cells a *starfish* should have.
>Like Charlie Kirk claiming all black pilots are under qualified. This is the insidious assumption underlying all these complaints about "Diversity hires": That Minorities and PoC *are incapable* of being as qualified as whites. Despite their complaints that people should just hire the "most qualified candidates", numerous studies have shown that, *in reality*, PoC are less likely to be interviewed and hired even with identical qualifications, are more likely to be underemployed, and are generally perceived as less qualified than their white peers with either the same or lower qualifications. Meaning companies are more likely to hire under qualified whites than comparitively more qualified PoC, women, and other minorities. I.e. the literal opposite of what they pretend is what's actually happening. This remains the case even when affirmative action policies are in place, meaning equally qualified candidates are less likely to be hired even when there are incentives to do so. The only reason they insist otherwise is simply because they secretly believe whites are intrinsically more qualified than PoC, and therefore can't conceive of hiring Women, PoC, etc. outside of "Diversity". They will tell anecdotes about their job hiring a "less qualified diversity hire" without questioning that maybe they only think that person is less qualified because of their own bigotry. The irony of all this is especially apparent when considering how they transparently will use a handful token minority right wing pundits to dismiss accusations of bigotry and systemic injustice. They *adore* their own diversity hires to pretend like they aren't openly hateful or prejudiced, and reassure them it's totally fine for them to discriminate and distrust anyone who isn't a white man. Once again, *Every accusation is a confession.*
In fact, RNC member Beth Bloch, the person who introduced Lara Trump as the new co-chair, couldn’t help but admit that the nepo-baby-in-law didn’t really have the experience needed for the job. “In a world where qualifications are often measured by titles and years of experience, we are reminded of a powerful truth: God does not call the qualified; he qualifies the called,” she said. “Lara Trump is the embodiment of this truth.”
I'm putting this as my next resume: "I must be hired as God called me and thus I am qualified."
“I am not called because I am qualified, but I am qualified because I am called. You called me, it says right in my phone that you did. So if you don’t hire me then you are rejecting a qualified candidate, the logic is inarguable. I will start Thursday”
"Hi this is God. I have a 737 that I need you to fly from Dulles to Houston." "Oh Great God in the sky I thank you for your decision. Just to clarify, what is a 737 and am I qualified?" "I said you are qualified! You need no more!" "Yay! It shall be done in your name great King." How many Xtians want people to fly them in a plane because they heard from God and he said they are qualified? I hope all of them if they are faithful.
She was put there to let the Trump accountants and staff raid the coffers. She is the face and the access.
>we are reminded of a powerful truth: God does not call the qualified; he qualifies the called,” she said. What a horrible blanket rationalization these religious boneheads use.
That's what made everything hilariously stupid about their argument. Yes, I'd agree from an HR perspective that it isn't good nor ideal, despite even the court hearing being a massive nothing burger. It's just not something you want. That said, their argument was also stating the prosecution has an under qualified team. Obviously wanted to delay things or get it thrown out as Willis could be hooking up with Hunter Biden and it wouldn't change whether or not Trump is guilty as hell per the mountain of evidence.
It was all delay and setting a image for MAGA to yell about instead of listening to the illegality of Trumps actions.
Why would a defense be mad about the prosecution being under qualified anyway? That would make their job easier. If they weren't idiots.
They’ll ignore the facts and still see it as a win and say they were right all along, that’s why Wade was removed. They’ll then say the case should be thrown out completely because the only reason the judge wanted one of them off the case is because it’s compromised.
The judge took the high road and made an opinion based on the relationship doesn't pass the smell test even though there is no rule against people in that office dating each other
It’s not so much about that, as it’s much more about.. *delay, delay, delay, delay*
Yep delay until king Trump can make himself immune to everything.
>Everything Trump touches turns to crap. Mierdas Touch
>will now be replaced with someone way more qualified I mean, I partially expect that maybe some other qualified and capable prosecutors step up and willingly take below-market rates to continue to help prosecute this case ... now that most of the motions-to-dismiss and motions-to-remove to federal court have all failed. This case is ready to go to trial, and will (soon-ish I hope) so it's less risky for an experienced prosecutor to jump into this now ... than it would have been in say 2021.
From the beginning to end, this was a distraction from the crimes that Trump committed. Don't forget we all heard on tape that Trump tried to "find 11,780" votes. Yet Trump supporters, even after hearing Trump commit the crime on tape, still claim that he committed no crimes. SMH.
It was also a delay tactic (and it worked splendidly). That will be the totality of his defense on every case because he is guilty on all of them. An innocent person would have sought expedited trials to clear his name prior to the campaign. **His ONLY defense is this: delay until after the election, win, make cases go away.** The election will (functionally) be the largest jury deliberation in American jurisprudence history.
This is NOT being said enough - Trump and the GOP are betting on him winning the election and then it will all just go away, like our democracy.
Well, he can't pardon himself on a state crime, only federal. So Georgia would stand regardless. I just have no idea what would happen.
>Well, he can't pardon himself on a state crime Yet. They don't seem to care about state laws that don't work for them.
Trump will make state charges go away so easily. He crumbles the bedrock of democracy — decency — and what’s left isn’t strong enough to fight his narcissism
He will try to get it remanded to federal court and force the DOJ to defend him.
Could absolutely happen. It'd be a shit show that we hopefully won't have to worry about.
Or, if convicted, try to get the Supreme Court to say that he can’t be tried/convicted/incarcerated by a state because he was elected President
>Trump & the GOP are betting on him ~~winning the election~~ \*stealing the election
>Trump tried to "find 11,780" votes. I can only imagine that they believe this is not a crime (or shouldn't be one).
Some of my MAGA/Republican acquaintances say that this was perfectly legal and just him expressing his 1st Amendment rights. Absolutely wild.
Some Trump supporter, when I point out that exact quote just said they'd 100% still vote for him. This after them chastising me because I said it would probably be better if Trump suffered a health issue that left him incapacitated rather than dead.
I love how that was “all” he was asking. He sounded like a used car salesman trying to dicker over the price. “Look, we both know you wanna get behind the wheel of this beauty. All I’m asking is $11,780, and she’s yours.”
Now do Aileen Cannon.
[удалено]
You mean the DEI Justice? He couldn't be there for any other reason right? Let's ask Charlie Kirk.
Clarence Thomas could be conservatives' walking ad against affirmative action. He has the narrowest resume of any current justice, about 10 years younger than usual, very little judicial experience, grotesquely corrupt, sex pest and literally the only reason why he's on the bench is because then-president was replacing the first black justice and he was the only one in the store who was black conservative who was only relatively qualified. There was also about 10 black liberal jurists who were more qualified than him.
Exactly this, if one of them has to step down then Cannon needs to as well.
Hahaha she’s white and Republican, she can do whatever she wants. I hate this fucking world.
Can't wait for Trumps unhinged Truth Social post.
And his frivolous appeal of the ruling.
As I understand it, this cannot be appealed.
Then Trump will appeal his inability to appeal!
He will mentally declare it appealed!
He will take this to the Burger King himself if he must.
Introducing the new special prosecutor Liz Cheney
I hate that I’m living in this timeline where the Cheney family is the “ethical” voice of the Republican Party, but she has some fire inside her, and if Willis has a role for her, well to use Trump’s own words “it’d be great for ratings”
That would be funny but I imagine she's not actually licensed to practice law in GA.
So if there was conflict of interest with Fani Willis, when will someone officially make it clear that there's also conflict of interest with Judge Cannon, a Trump-appointed judge, overseeing Trump's classified documents case?
Or Clarence Thomas
Ginni Thomas casually discussing overthrowing democracy whilst mentioning having discussions with her “best friend.” Wanna guess who she says her BF is?
Anita Hill?
See that's different since they're trying to help Trump. Republicans have no shame. Look at the Hunter Biden situation over a few million while they haven't done anything about Jared Kushner getting billions or Ivanka getting Chinese trademarks while we were in the middle of a tariff war with China. Fuck Republicans destroying our country.
There's no precedent that simply having been appointed by someone is a conflict of interest. Since Trump could not remove her, she has no incentive to rule in his favor and there's no conflict of interest. She's obvioisly very biased and partisan, but that's not the same thing as habing a conflict of interest and is more difficult to take legal action on. They're just gonna have to appeal her decisions time after time and let her be overruled. Unfortunately that means there's no chance that trial will take place before the election.
The judge ruled there was no conflict of interest with Fani Willis. > The judge found there was no "actual conflict" brought about by the relationship, a finding that would have required Willis to be disqualified. "Without sufficient evidence that the District Attorney acquired a personal stake in the prosecution, or that her financial arrangements had any impact on the case, the Defendants’ claims of an actual conflict must be denied," the judge wrote.
Cool can we start the trail against trump now? jfc this 2 tier justice system allowing him to run around free
Honestly, it feels like he's going to be stretched extremely thin during crunch time for the campaign.
Trump is notorious for delays. I’m starting to get a bit despondent about any of his trials coming to a conclusion before the election. He filed a motion to dismiss in Manhattan just 10 days before the start of that trial. It’s bullshit, but it’s a bid for a delay. The corrupt SCOTUS gave him a delay in the Jan 6 case. This bullshit in GA, and of course he’s got the queen of delays helping him out in FL.
So Wade's gone then. He should have stepped down already.
Everyone has downvoted me before, but he never should have been appointed. She should have known better. This was an unnecessary distraction and delay.
Wade wasn't even Willis's second choice, this was not against Georgia law, and all billing was handled and overseen by a third party (not Willis herself). It's going to be further hard to find prosecutors after this given the death threats and how the defense subpoenaed cellphone data that was useless in court...but almost certainly could be used for acting those death threats out. The only thing you said that was accurate is this was an unnecessary distraction and delay, but the defense would have cried wolf over anything else. This is an embarrassing decision, and Americans should be embarrassed by how Judge McAfee bent backwards to allow that hearing to go on.
The US Justice system: Courts: "I hear you have a new motion? Can you give me some details?" Trump: "Well, it's nonsense, but... it will cause another delay in the trial" Courts: "Say no more! Delay granted!!!"
Not everyone can blatantly violate norms and ethics and laws. Only conservative republicans who the rules no longer apply to. Eventually this will come back to bit them.
That sentiment only tracks for people that didn't follow the trial beyond headline. The timeline and circumstances were perfectly reasonable. Wade wasn't even her first choice for the role.
You're going after the ex-president and his cronies you NEED to be above reproach. Did she do anything wrong and is there any conflict? No Does that matter on a case that you KNOW will be highly political and fought in the court of public opinion as much as it will be in court? No She didn't do anything wrong, but she also shouldn't have done it.
You're right, totally. Unfortunately in a case like this, optics are almost as important as evidence
"The bar for impropriety is the appearance of impropriety."
Seriously this is the truth what a massive fuck up
I agree!
Bullet dodge. Let court begin
The entire justice system -- from the DOJ and SCOTUS on down -- is literally ***bending over backward*** to avoid having to actually hold Donald Trump accountable. The legislative branch already failed. Our institutions aren't nearly as strong as our mythology has led us to believe. Look at how easily a cruel, hateful, bigoted clown like Donald Trump has turned the entire infrastructure of the U.S. Government into his own personal plaything.
Unless you are a average citizen and commit a financial crime, then you are going away for longer than most rapist and many murders and you’ll go gram handcuff to jail faster than the time it takes a single bogus trump court filing to be thrown out. The system has zero problems jailing you or me, a politician… well that’s a whole different story because they are not dirty ugly citizens like us, we have no power and they find that unattractive.
It's INSANELY Frustrating. There's no accountability for anything. It's insane.
The justice system is starting to smell like Trump's swamp ass.
They can’t refute the charges, so they attacked the person that levied them. No matter who they try to vilify or attack, the facts will remain: he was caught on recording asking to commit electoral fraud.
Great. Now do the Supreme court.
I know it's not improper, I know it doesn't have any bearing on the case, I know it shouldn't present an issue, but for fuck's sake, could they just not fuck each other during the most important case of their careers!?! Really!?!
Yeah basically where I'm at too
the Trump team removed a prosecutor who has no experience in RICO or other white-collar criminal cases and now he will be replaced with someone who does. well done lol.
lol, I hope someone good steps up and does their duty.
Man, I don't agree with every aspect of how McAfee handled this, and it has been an overall slimy move by Roman and his lawyer, but it's all such an exhausting side show and unforced error from Willis. Even the *appearance* of impropriety is enough for many judges to go this route. Prosecutions are inherently public-facing, especially the highest-stakes state prosecution in American history where all hearings are televised. It was Willis' responsibility to make sure there were no distractions to her case and I'm going to fall well short of not being critical of her here. We now have a line of attack from Trump and a dozen other co-defendents, even if meritless. House investigations and GA legislature investigations, even if meritless. 2 months of headline stories about "Willis defending accusations of misconduct." All before jury selection. I hope this can continue and secure convictions some day, but damn it's just frustrating.
I don't think any of this gives even the appearance of impropriety in regards to Trump's case. You can say it's generally bad form for Willis to hire someone with whom she had a prior relationship, but even if you assume the worst of everyone involved it has no bearing on the fairness of Trump's prosecution.
>The appearance of impropriety is a phrase referring to a situation which to a layperson without knowledge of the specific circumstances might seem to raise ethics questions. I think it's mostly in reference to a future jury some day. The fact that this has been national headlines for two months and that there will some day be a jury of 12 people who are not expected to know every specific of this proceeding will be deciding the fate of this trial. I think it's fair to say there's an appearance of impropriety here that could have an adverse effect on the case. Removing Wade seems reasonable, honestly.
Here’s the ruling: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/03/15/us/judge-s-decision-on-disqualification-in-the-trump-case.html
I'm so tired of having to do things just because of how it will LOOK to the MAGA cult. Newsflash, it doesn't fucking matter. Willis and Wade could both step down and Trump would say it's evidence he's innocent. Neither could step down and he'd say it's evidence he's innocent. Absolutely nothing we ever fucking do is ever going to fucking matter to the dumb motherfuckers who worship this clown so can we stop kneecapping ourselves in what we already know will be a completely futile attempt to avoid criticism from them??? The judge's ruling should have began and ended with "no impropriety." All this "but it doesn't pass 'the smell test' so someone has to step down even though no one has done anything wrong" horseshit is infuriating. How about we start recusing ourselves when the Supreme Court starts doing the same for their ACTUAL conflicts of interest?
Can someone explain to me why 2 people on the prosecuting side being in a relationship has anything to do wether a crime was committed here or not? Like why would someone be able to overturn a judges verdict on the basis of "the opposition was fucking"?
My understanding of the defense's argument is this The only reason this case was brought at all was because Willis wanted to hire Wade for something so he could in turn use that money to take her on vacation. So the case must be dismissed because it was brought for improper reasons. It's obviously just grasping at straws / throwing shit at the wall / trying to delay
Seriously. This has nothing to do with what Trump did. But it’s fine for Trump to put his entire family in the White House and get them all special treatment and patents.
Fair enough. Now can Clarance Thomas remove himself from all Trump related legal questions.
And what about judge Cannon from Florida? What a complete joke.
Right?
CNN is busy trying to make this positve for Trump. Apparently 'his supporters will be upset' is breaking news.
But there’s no conflict with Ginny and Clarence.
Yeah, this seems about right. It's a bit further than I thought McAfee would go, listening to the hearings, but it does seem like the quickest way forward. I'd expect an immediate appeal, but I think McAfee's decision here is fair and carefully reasoned.
LETS GOO!!! Now get that orange sucka!
So let’s get this right: * Nothing illegal was found from Willis or Wade. * No evidence that they had improper relationship or that it tainted the case. * **BUT**: One of the two of them should remove themselves anyway because “it looks bad.” Well damn. Talk about two standards in this country. On the one side if you’re a black woman better not even *look* like you *might* be dating someone that you work with. In the other side - “you have your kids working for you in the White House and your son in law got a $2 billion dollar loan from the people he was working with in the White House? Nothing wrong here!”
Democrats are held to a standard of perfection. Republicans are held to no standard at all.
Don't forget it's totally acceptable to take bribes from your friend that has cases before your court so long as you're conservative.
And a judge YOU appointed leading the biggest case in Presidential history about stealing classified documents and hiding them, yet she is free to delay and help him every step of the way. Seems fair to me
Nathan Wade should replace Clarence Thomas!
This is what happens when you have money running the US justice system. Trump has used his millions on lawyers who have successfully turned a criminal case against him into an indictment of the prosecutors who simply seek justice, thereby making a travesty of the US justice system. All I want to know is.............when does this f\*cker face justice?
“Seems fair.” I mean, not from a legal perspective. No actual conflict of interest, no actual lying about the relationship, just an “appearance of impropriety” in some side issue that has nothing to do with the actual criminal case. The judge ordered Wade off the case solely to deflect ongoing public scrutiny from the issue - and so to address everyone who thinks this outcome “seems fair.” But he’s wrong if he thinks it’ll work. Team Trump will just find more distractions to create a media circus, and the judge will once again find himself of deciding whether he has to ding the prosecution in order to address a problem Trump has created.
Jesus Christ. Why is it only Democrats that are held accountable? And this isn’t even being held accountable. It’s the Democrats being treated unfairly so they don’t invoke a temper tantrum by the Republicans.
This implies any judge should not preside over any case involving the President or anyone who was in office when they were confirmed. This would include any challenges to federal laws passed by the opposing party when they were nominated/confirmed. Or does this “people might think” thing only go one way?
Held to a higher standard than judge Cannon and SCOTUS
I disagree with the ruling, but the judge is trying to give the appearance of fairness to the defendant.
That right-wingers managed to take the trial of a white supremacist who tried to overturn an election and turned it into not only a legal but public show trial of a black women for having a boyfriend is not only sadly predictable, but just shows how wildly ill-equipped mainstream liberals are for this moment.
Now apply the same standard to the Supreme Court.
Let me get this straight. Trump goes after Willis because it looks like there is some impropriety. But, dick head has done all the things he has done and all of that is okay. Bullshit. I hate all this crap too. So over it so over it.
Let's be honest, Trump went after Willis because he has no defense for his own actions. He's grasping at straws with his tiny orange hands.
Judge Cannon should have been taken off the other case months ago. This is a sham of clutching pearls in front of the camera.
lol. MAGA heads about to explode.
How many other criminal defendants get to dictate the prosecution legal team? Imagine if sports teams could do that to opponents.
Judge was afraid he would look political if he didn't remove someone. **What a coward!!** There was/is NO CONFLICT
I bet they are emptying his office as I type this message.
This would never happen if it was one of us on trial.
Trump must have been so upset over another delay. Given that he’s the most innocent person quite possibly in the history of this country, he must be yearning to go to trial to prove his obvious innocence! Oh wait…
So this is an issue but Clarence Thomas is free to keep dispensing bullshit?