196

Georgia court of appeals indefinitely pauses the election subversion conspiracy case against Donald Trump (www.cnn.com)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

27 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 28 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] [email protected] 82 points 1 month ago

This is one of those examples that we can all point to for why Trump’s behavior as a corrupt mob-style boss is not just bravado, and anyone who tells you it is is either ignorant or has an ulterior motive.

There is no conflict of interest here, and I also firmly believe there isn’t even an appearance of a conflict of interest. A Georgia lawyer can correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe there’s a specific statue that spells out that it is acceptable for a married couple to be on opposing sides of a trial. It was determined that’s entirely fine. So how could it be that two prosecutors, who happen to be fucking, while working on the same side of a trial have a conflict of interest? What, they know how each other look naked, so that gives them some legal advantage over their platonic opposition? It just doesn’t track.

[-] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago

I don't know about Georgia but at least in New Jersey that's not allowed. Not only that buts it's defense choice of attorney.

Several years ago, I was in legal trouble. I was recommended a lawyer by a distant family friend. That lawyer happened to be the wife of the lead prosecutor.the lead prosecutor was immediately dismissed from the case and another prosecutor appointed.

I got off with a light sentence and have cleaned up my life. That said who knows what would of happened if I had a different lawyer, the prosecutor was notorious for being hard and firm in his cases. I probably would of fared worse but he couldn't touch the case and a junior prosecutor was assigned. As I said different state so different lawyers but kind of makes sense. You can't monitor opposing benches communication or shared knowledge or deals...a lot of political questions not typically worth dealing with.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

That’s super interesting, thanks for sharing your experience! The way you describe it, it actually makes a lot of sense that deference would be given to the defense side.

I’m so conflicted, because I tend to automatically sympathize with most defendants since the system is so often stacked against them. Trump has turned that upside down. Never thought I’d cheer for a prosecutor…

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

It's a bit rough on justice if everyone knows they just have to hire a guy's wife to get his hardass off their case. I guess it makes sure she has clients, though.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

So, you hired the wife of the prosecutor as your defense? That's very different than there being a relationship between two attorneys on the same counsel having a relationship.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

This isn't because they were fucking.

This is because she is fucking a guy she personally selected to pay as a consultant using state funds, who then paid for vacations for her. The appearance of a conflict of interest is that it would be in her best interest to continue this case as long as possible to continue paying this dude, who will then continue using that money she's paying him to take her on vacations.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Yeah. It’s the “illegal” use of state money that’s damming imo. Well I dunno if illegal but I hope it is.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

They're saying that the appointment itself was improper.

[-] [email protected] 30 points 1 month ago

Which removing the appointed prosecutor would render moot, which they've already done.

Their argument is that the case was only brought so that the prosecutor would be hired and then kick back money to the DA. It's laughable on its face.

[-] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

Yeah, I could see it as a conflict if she only appointed him after they started dating, but Willis testified vehemently that they only started their relationship after she appointed him. She said the witness who claimed otherwise was either lying or misremembering. I guess it comes down to who should be believed, and while I would never blindly believe any officer of the state, I think she has more credibility than Trump and his defense team.

[-] [email protected] 61 points 1 month ago

Regardless of what happens Fani is dumb as hell for having someone she’s romantically involved with on her team. She had to know they’d come at her with anything they possibly could

[-] [email protected] 23 points 1 month ago

Yes that’s so dumb. It’s like obviously stupid. He could have stepped down and I’m sure she could have instantly found someone impartial to take his place.

I know there isn’t technically a conflict of interest, but there appears to be and that’s enough.

[-] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago

She's a prosecutor, the actual corruption by the court overshadows the appearance of corruption by counsel. That argument about appearances never matters when it appears that the courts are favoring Trump as a defendant. The American political establishment wants to destroy the government.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

The defense has a married couple acting as their lawyer. Prior to dating apps, almost all relationships originated from the workplace. EVERYONE in my family married, over the age of 20, meet via work. I met my wife from a college summer job.

It's all bullshit whatsboutism used by a literal fascist.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

Correct it doesn’t, I agree. But that’s the status quo, that’s what the prosecution has to fight against. They ARE on their back foot because of Trump’s enormous and violent following. And when you’re on your back foot, you have to be perfect. It’s unfair and it’s total shit. But they screwed up.

[-] [email protected] 38 points 1 month ago

If she just handed it off to a different prosecutor, how long would it take for them to get up to speed? If there is a back-up ready to go, it sounds like this prosecutor is risking the entire trial over stubbornness and pride.

[-] [email protected] 29 points 1 month ago

It's a team of prosecutors that started at 4, now is at 3 after Wade got kicked off. Now it would be down to 2 if she steps down. Typically simpler cases only have 1 prosecutor so if most of the legwork is done they might be able to proceed with 2 or add someone. I agree though this case is much bigger than one persons career.

[-] [email protected] 28 points 1 month ago

19 defendents and RICO charges has a lot of moving parts.

[-] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

No doubt. Starting to look more and more like none of these other 3 cases will be resolved before the election.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

The 1/6 case still has a shot assuming the Supreme Court doesn't outright say he has immunity, that's the only thing holding it up.

Of course, Cannon is going to rule in Florida if Jack Smith has the right to actually, as Special Prosecutor, you know, prosecute the Florida case. I could see the Trump lawyers spinning that around and say "Well, if he can't prosecute one case, then he can't prosecute the other either."

At which point somebody owes Bill Clinton a giant apology over the whole Kenneth Starr bullshit.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

as intended (by the defendants)

[-] [email protected] -2 points 1 month ago

With 4 years to prepare. Staged

[-] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago

In unrelated news, Georgia Court of Appeals sporting all new luxury RVs.

[-] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago

conspiracy case against Donald Trump

Do you mean Convicted Felon Donald Trump?

[-] [email protected] 18 points 1 month ago

I'm fucking furious at Fani Willis for this shit. She's the fucking lead prosecutor in one of the biggest, highest profile court cases in US history. Likely world history, since world leaders have almost never been tried in court before. It's a goddamn open and shut case, too, since he is on audio doing the thing he is accused of doing. All she has to do is keep it in her pants until the trial is over.

And again, this isn't purely about her keeping it in her pants. This is about not taking vacations with the guy she hired who is paid for by the state. If you are going to try taking down the fucking former president of the US, you have to walk the tightest tight rope ever to be walked. You can't have simple fuck ups like this. This is so obvious! Every single person who has ever worked at a large organization, government or corporation is shown the "be careful if you date your coworkers" video. Every single manager at those places are also shown the "don't date the people you manage" video. She hired him and manages him. This is obvious shit to not do.

[-] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago

lol where’s that idiot that told me this has no impact on the case at? 😆

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

In a sane world, it shouldn't. But our "justice" system has become a corrupt joke.

this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2024

196 points (98.5% liked)

News

21860 readers

3794 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]