GA Case

[Anonymous]

Now we will have a live broadcast of Fani being interrogated by Trump's lawyers on the stand at the evidentiary hearing scheduled for mid February. What an irony.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe Fani will begin to feel like she is being 'abandoned' by Biden and the White House (now that she has become a liability) and begin contemplating a 'deal' with the GA Attorney General proactively (remember, the one who runs to the prosecutor first usually gets the best deal) to flip on Biden (or provide other information) to get a lenient disposition on any and all criminal exposure she may face in GA. Real possibility.

☝️literally nothing that has been typed above is a grounded in reality. Please return to earth prime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now we will have a live broadcast of Fani being interrogated by Trump's lawyers on the stand at the evidentiary hearing scheduled for mid February. What an irony.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like Fani might be on the receiving side of a prosecution. Wonder if she will choose to defend herself.

She should hire the Nathan's Hotdog since he is supposed to be a 'Super Star' lawyer.

More like a gigolo ambulance chaser sleeping his way to the top.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Morally questionable? Sure. Illegal? No.

And for the millionth time, none of this absolves Trump or erases the case against him. At best it delays the case, which is really all Trump wants.

For the millionth time, none of the Trump allegations erase the case against Willis. It delays the case bigly, which is really all Trump wants.

This trial wasn’t going to happen any time soon anyway. These multi-defendant RICO trials take years to get to trial and then a year or more to actually try them. So I don’t see any delays from this as actually mattering.

That's not what the Dems were hoping and praying BEFORE Fani got her behind whipped. Some .pPolls show significant number of Independents/Moderates saying they won't vote for Trump if he is convicted. Ok I guess Dems want to have this go to trial in 2028.

Who was saying this case was going to trial this year? I haven’t heard anyone say that. The ones that folks think/thought would go to trial this year are the DC case and the NY case.

Fani was. At least that is what she was hoping for.....

Georgia DA seeks Aug. 5 trial for Trump in election interference case
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/17/georgia-da-seeks-aug-5-trial-for-trump-in-election-interference-case.html

The judge had already said no to that.

But the story is that WH was pushing to Rank to try the Trump case in the summer of this and have a conviction before the election. Now they are singing a different tune.

Wut?
This post is unintelligible.

There is some allegation that the White House was telling Fani to move the GA case along quickly and get a verdict before the election. In order to get a verdict by November, the trial had to take place in August or September at the latest.

There's some allegation, huh.

[Anonymous]

So it’s ok for her to run a prosecution-for-pay kickback scheme where she brings a case so she and her unqualified boyfriend can party on the taxpayer money that she stuffs in his pockets?

And billing for more hours doesn’t mean that he actually worked more hours, as evidenced by at least four instances where he claimed that he worked 24 hours straight.

7


Reply

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So it’s ok for her to run a prosecution-for-pay kickback scheme where she brings a case so she and her unqualified boyfriend can party on the taxpayer money that she stuffs in his pockets?

And billing for more hours doesn’t mean that he actually worked more hours, as evidenced by at least four instances where he claimed that he worked 24 hours straight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it’s ok for her to run a prosecution-for-pay kickback scheme where she brings a case so she and her unqualified boyfriend can party on the taxpayer money that she stuffs in his pockets?

And billing for more hours doesn’t mean that he actually worked more hours, as evidenced by at least four instances where he claimed that he worked 24 hours straight.

All this is just you spouting off, not facts or evidence. So null and void.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The affidavit attached to the response destroys the whole (already weak) conflict of interest narrative. The relationship started after he was hired, so she didn't "hire her boyfriend" as was alleged. And Willis has paid for travel for him in addition to him buying it for her. McAfee will hold a hearing to confirm the facts and then deny the motion. MAGAs heads will explode.

They have witnesses that will refute this. And, the accusations that they were actually living together.
If this is true, another problem in that she lied on her affidavit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The affidavit attached to the response destroys the whole (already weak) conflict of interest narrative. The relationship started after he was hired, so she didn't "hire her boyfriend" as was alleged. And Willis has paid for travel for him in addition to him buying it for her. McAfee will hold a hearing to confirm the facts and then deny the motion. MAGAs heads will explode.

They have witnesses that will refute this. And, the accusations that they were actually living together.
If this is true, another problem in that she lied on her affidavit.

Okay Charlie Kirk follower. He's an insurrection planner. You have a few screws loose. Almost nothing he says is grounded in reality. Except:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The affidavit attached to the response destroys the whole (already weak) conflict of interest narrative. The relationship started after he was hired, so she didn't "hire her boyfriend" as was alleged. And Willis has paid for travel for him in addition to him buying it for her. McAfee will hold a hearing to confirm the facts and then deny the motion. MAGAs heads will explode.

They have witnesses that will refute this. And, the accusations that they were actually living together.
If this is true, another problem in that she lied on her affidavit.

Okay Charlie Kirk follower. He's an insurrection planner. You have a few screws loose. Almost nothing he says is grounded in reality. Except:

You are hilarious. And, wildly off topic.
I'll file this under "When you don't like the message, shoot the messenger."

Let me help you with how information is conveyed. A given X user posts information from a source and summarizes that information in the post.
And, if you don't believe the post, here it is from a different source:

Fani Willis, in Pursuit of Trump, Is Accused of Lying About a Serious Question — When Her Love Affair With Nathan Wade Began

The confession of the district attorney of Georgia’s Fulton County, Fani Willis, that she has a “personal relationship” with the man she hired to prosecute President Trump, Nathan Wade, could soon give way to an even more fateful inquiry: When did the affair begin?

That question is set to take center stage at an evidentiary hearing at Fulton County on February 15, but Ms. Willis wants that occasion scratched from the calendar, a request she has filed in court. She maintains that since she has acknowledged the affair, on the record, and denied that it predates Mr. Wade’s appointment, further fact-finding is superfluous. Her defendants disagree.

Much could hang on when that amorous alliance first kindled. If Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade were intimate before she appointed him special prosecutor — that is the contention of Mr. Trump and his co-defendants — then their role in the sprawling racketeering case, which alleges a “criminal enterprise” to overturn the results of the 2020 election, could be threatened.

Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade are both on record as asserting that the affair began after he was appointed special prosecutor. Mr. Wade, in an affidavit attached to the district attorney, writes that “in 2022, District Attorney Willis and I developed a personal relationship in addition to our professional association and friendship.” He was appointed the year prior.

The defendant who first moved for Ms. Willis’s disqualification, Michael Roman, contends that the affair predates the charging. In a filing, his lawyer, Ashleigh Merchant, calls Ms. Willis’s proffered timeline “false” and suggests that the relationship stretches as far back as 2019. If Ms. Merchant can prove her allegation, Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade will have to worry about not only a conflict of interest, but also possible perjury.

https://www.nysun.com/article/fani-willis-is-accused-of-lying-about-a-serious-question-when-her-love-affair-with-nathan-wade-began

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The affidavit attached to the response destroys the whole (already weak) conflict of interest narrative. The relationship started after he was hired, so she didn't "hire her boyfriend" as was alleged. And Willis has paid for travel for him in addition to him buying it for her. McAfee will hold a hearing to confirm the facts and then deny the motion. MAGAs heads will explode.

They have witnesses that will refute this. And, the accusations that they were actually living together.
If this is true, another problem in that she lied on her affidavit.

Yeah, wait for the "witnesses".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The affidavit attached to the response destroys the whole (already weak) conflict of interest narrative. The relationship started after he was hired, so she didn't "hire her boyfriend" as was alleged. And Willis has paid for travel for him in addition to him buying it for her. McAfee will hold a hearing to confirm the facts and then deny the motion. MAGAs heads will explode.

They have witnesses that will refute this. And, the accusations that they were actually living together.
If this is true, another problem in that she lied on her affidavit.

Okay Charlie Kirk follower. He's an insurrection planner. You have a few screws loose. Almost nothing he says is grounded in reality. Except:

You are hilarious. And, wildly off topic.
I'll file this under "When you don't like the message, shoot the messenger."

Let me help you with how information is conveyed. A given X user posts information from a source and summarizes that information in the post.
And, if you don't believe the post, here it is from a different source:

Fani Willis, in Pursuit of Trump, Is Accused of Lying About a Serious Question — When Her Love Affair With Nathan Wade Began

The confession of the district attorney of Georgia’s Fulton County, Fani Willis, that she has a “personal relationship” with the man she hired to prosecute President Trump, Nathan Wade, could soon give way to an even more fateful inquiry: When did the affair begin?

That question is set to take center stage at an evidentiary hearing at Fulton County on February 15, but Ms. Willis wants that occasion scratched from the calendar, a request she has filed in court. She maintains that since she has acknowledged the affair, on the record, and denied that it predates Mr. Wade’s appointment, further fact-finding is superfluous. Her defendants disagree.

Much could hang on when that amorous alliance first kindled. If Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade were intimate before she appointed him special prosecutor — that is the contention of Mr. Trump and his co-defendants — then their role in the sprawling racketeering case, which alleges a “criminal enterprise” to overturn the results of the 2020 election, could be threatened.

Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade are both on record as asserting that the affair began after he was appointed special prosecutor. Mr. Wade, in an affidavit attached to the district attorney, writes that “in 2022, District Attorney Willis and I developed a personal relationship in addition to our professional association and friendship.” He was appointed the year prior.

The defendant who first moved for Ms. Willis’s disqualification, Michael Roman, contends that the affair predates the charging. In a filing, his lawyer, Ashleigh Merchant, calls Ms. Willis’s proffered timeline “false” and suggests that the relationship stretches as far back as 2019. If Ms. Merchant can prove her allegation, Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade will have to worry about not only a conflict of interest, but also possible perjury.

https://www.nysun.com/article/fani-willis-is-accused-of-lying-about-a-serious-question-when-her-love-affair-with-nathan-wade-began

Fani facing:

Criminal-

1) Federal misuse of covid funds;
2) Federal 'honest services fraud' (vendor kickback);
2) State RICO charges;
3) Misuse of State and/or County covid funds w/o requisite approvals;
4) State perjury charges;

Administrative/disciplinary-

1) US House investigation of misuse of federal funds;
2) GA Senate investigation of misuse of State funds and/or misconduct by DA;
3) GA House Impeachment inquiry;
4) Complaint for violation of Rules of professional Conduct of GA attorneys at GA Bar;
5) Fulton County investigation on misuse of County funds;

Fani's subpoena for sworn deposition in Wade's divorce matter is on 'hold' for now so she may have to be deposed in the near future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The affidavit attached to the response destroys the whole (already weak) conflict of interest narrative. The relationship started after he was hired, so she didn't "hire her boyfriend" as was alleged. And Willis has paid for travel for him in addition to him buying it for her. McAfee will hold a hearing to confirm the facts and then deny the motion. MAGAs heads will explode.

They have witnesses that will refute this. And, the accusations that they were actually living together.
If this is true, another problem in that she lied on her affidavit.

Okay Charlie Kirk follower. He's an insurrection planner. You have a few screws loose. Almost nothing he says is grounded in reality. Except:

You are hilarious. And, wildly off topic.
I'll file this under "When you don't like the message, shoot the messenger."

Let me help you with how information is conveyed. A given X user posts information from a source and summarizes that information in the post.
And, if you don't believe the post, here it is from a different source:

Fani Willis, in Pursuit of Trump, Is Accused of Lying About a Serious Question — When Her Love Affair With Nathan Wade Began

The confession of the district attorney of Georgia’s Fulton County, Fani Willis, that she has a “personal relationship” with the man she hired to prosecute President Trump, Nathan Wade, could soon give way to an even more fateful inquiry: When did the affair begin?

That question is set to take center stage at an evidentiary hearing at Fulton County on February 15, but Ms. Willis wants that occasion scratched from the calendar, a request she has filed in court. She maintains that since she has acknowledged the affair, on the record, and denied that it predates Mr. Wade’s appointment, further fact-finding is superfluous. Her defendants disagree.

Much could hang on when that amorous alliance first kindled. If Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade were intimate before she appointed him special prosecutor — that is the contention of Mr. Trump and his co-defendants — then their role in the sprawling racketeering case, which alleges a “criminal enterprise” to overturn the results of the 2020 election, could be threatened.

Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade are both on record as asserting that the affair began after he was appointed special prosecutor. Mr. Wade, in an affidavit attached to the district attorney, writes that “in 2022, District Attorney Willis and I developed a personal relationship in addition to our professional association and friendship.” He was appointed the year prior.

The defendant who first moved for Ms. Willis’s disqualification, Michael Roman, contends that the affair predates the charging. In a filing, his lawyer, Ashleigh Merchant, calls Ms. Willis’s proffered timeline “false” and suggests that the relationship stretches as far back as 2019. If Ms. Merchant can prove her allegation, Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade will have to worry about not only a conflict of interest, but also possible perjury.

https://www.nysun.com/article/fani-willis-is-accused-of-lying-about-a-serious-question-when-her-love-affair-with-nathan-wade-began

Fani facing:

Criminal-

1) Federal misuse of covid funds;
2) Federal 'honest services fraud' (vendor kickback);
2) State RICO charges;
3) Misuse of State and/or County covid funds w/o requisite approvals;
4) State perjury charges;

Administrative/disciplinary-

1) US House investigation of misuse of federal funds;
2) GA Senate investigation of misuse of State funds and/or misconduct by DA;
3) GA House Impeachment inquiry;
4) Complaint for violation of Rules of professional Conduct of GA attorneys at GA Bar;
5) Fulton County investigation on misuse of County funds;

Fani's subpoena for sworn deposition in Wade's divorce matter is on 'hold' for now so she may have to be deposed in the near future.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The affidavit attached to the response destroys the whole (already weak) conflict of interest narrative. The relationship started after he was hired, so she didn't "hire her boyfriend" as was alleged. And Willis has paid for travel for him in addition to him buying it for her. McAfee will hold a hearing to confirm the facts and then deny the motion. MAGAs heads will explode.

They have witnesses that will refute this. And, the accusations that they were actually living together.
If this is true, another problem in that she lied on her affidavit.

Okay Charlie Kirk follower. He's an insurrection planner. You have a few screws loose. Almost nothing he says is grounded in reality. Except:

You are hilarious. And, wildly off topic.
I'll file this under "When you don't like the message, shoot the messenger."

Let me help you with how information is conveyed. A given X user posts information from a source and summarizes that information in the post.
And, if you don't believe the post, here it is from a different source:

Fani Willis, in Pursuit of Trump, Is Accused of Lying About a Serious Question — When Her Love Affair With Nathan Wade Began

The confession of the district attorney of Georgia’s Fulton County, Fani Willis, that she has a “personal relationship” with the man she hired to prosecute President Trump, Nathan Wade, could soon give way to an even more fateful inquiry: When did the affair begin?

That question is set to take center stage at an evidentiary hearing at Fulton County on February 15, but Ms. Willis wants that occasion scratched from the calendar, a request she has filed in court. She maintains that since she has acknowledged the affair, on the record, and denied that it predates Mr. Wade’s appointment, further fact-finding is superfluous. Her defendants disagree.

Much could hang on when that amorous alliance first kindled. If Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade were intimate before she appointed him special prosecutor — that is the contention of Mr. Trump and his co-defendants — then their role in the sprawling racketeering case, which alleges a “criminal enterprise” to overturn the results of the 2020 election, could be threatened.

Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade are both on record as asserting that the affair began after he was appointed special prosecutor. Mr. Wade, in an affidavit attached to the district attorney, writes that “in 2022, District Attorney Willis and I developed a personal relationship in addition to our professional association and friendship.” He was appointed the year prior.

The defendant who first moved for Ms. Willis’s disqualification, Michael Roman, contends that the affair predates the charging. In a filing, his lawyer, Ashleigh Merchant, calls Ms. Willis’s proffered timeline “false” and suggests that the relationship stretches as far back as 2019. If Ms. Merchant can prove her allegation, Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade will have to worry about not only a conflict of interest, but also possible perjury.

https://www.nysun.com/article/fani-willis-is-accused-of-lying-about-a-serious-question-when-her-love-affair-with-nathan-wade-began

Fani facing:

Criminal-

1) Federal misuse of covid funds;
2) Federal 'honest services fraud' (vendor kickback);
2) State RICO charges;
3) Misuse of State and/or County covid funds w/o requisite approvals;
4) State perjury charges;

Administrative/disciplinary-

1) US House investigation of misuse of federal funds;
2) GA Senate investigation of misuse of State funds and/or misconduct by DA;
3) GA House Impeachment inquiry;
4) Complaint for violation of Rules of professional Conduct of GA attorneys at GA Bar;
5) Fulton County investigation on misuse of County funds;

Fani's subpoena for sworn deposition in Wade's divorce matter is on 'hold' for now so she may have to be deposed in the near future.

+1

Your sources are community college drop out Charlie Kirk and the New York Sun. Can you read above eighth grade level? What happened to this forum?