Reply to GA Case

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "GA Case"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This is a typical Trump strategy -- he's used it many, many times over the years. Obfuscate and distract, and drag things out as long as possible. They are good at digging up dirt on people -- Fanni should have done a little more research into Trump's tactics. This is a tried and true strategy. He repeats it because it works, and Fanni is his latest victim.

[/b]She shouldn't have had a relationship at work, period. But it wasn't a crime, no nepotism, no one's screaming sexual abuse here. [b]It has nothing to do with the prosecution of Trump and his allies -- NOTHING.

Read it for what it is, and don't fall into the trap they set for you.

Let the trial begin!!! [/quote]

It actually is a crime. She violated Fulton County ethics laws. She had a legal duty to disclose the relationship and any gifts over $100. She did not. Additionally, she has opened up Fulton County to potential hostile workplace and discrimination claims. You do not date people you have supervisory responsibility over period. Any company in the US with HR policies in place would fire you for this.

Two things can be true at once. She can be guilty and so can Trump/the other defendents. [/quote]

Yes, Trump is still guilty.

Beyond that, I have to disagree on 2 points:

1. Fulton County DOES NOT require disclosure of who you're dating - https://cm.fultoncountyga.gov/-/media/Forms/Clerk-to-Commission-Forms/IncomeandFinancialDisclosureReport-Final.pdf

2. There weren't any gifts for Willis to disclose.  With regard to meals and trips, she went dutch with him and repaid him for any gifts given, with her own hard-earned money out of her own pocket.   She was quite clear on that in her testimony and nothing to the contrary has been shown or proven.[/quote]

1.  Wrong.  
According to the Fulton County Government Guidebook: Personnel Policies and Procedures, there is a policy regarding the employment of relatives. The policy states that a “relative” includes “relationships between individuals who are in a consensual romantic, sexual, dating or other intimate relationship, regardless of whether they are cohabitating.”

The policy states that the county “discourages relationships that could disrupt the work environment or lead to an actual or perceived conflict of interest.”

According to the policy, before an employment offer can be made to a relative of an employee, “an Appointing Authority must submit a written request for approval to the Chief Human Resources Officer.” The approval request must also show “that the relative is the person best qualified to perform the work required by the position.”

The “Appointing Authorities are responsible for ensuring that this procedure is followed when hiring the relative of a current employee,” the policy also reads. “Appointing Authorities who extend job offers to relatives of current employees without the approval of either the Chief Human Resources Officer or County Manager may be subject to disciplinary action by the County Manager.”

Also, “no individual shall be hired, promoted or permitted to transfer into any position where the Appointing Authority, department head or someone who will be in the employee’s direct chain of command is a relative,” according to the policy. “Pre-existing employment relationships falling within the purview of this paragraph will be permitted to continue; however, that exception does not apply to reemployment, promotions, demotions, reassignments, and lateral transfers that occur after the effective date of this Policy.”

Additionally, per the policy, “No individual shall be hired, reinstated, reemployed, transferred, promoted, demoted or assigned to any position that is under the direct or indirect supervision or control of a relative.” 
https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/fulton-county-policy-states-both-da-willis-wade-were-required?utm_source=mux&utm_medium=social-media&utm_campaign=social-media-autopost

2.  She has ZERO proof that she paid for the trips and meals.  Wade tried to claim that they shared expenses by producing a SINGLE expense showing that Fani had paid for travel and then said that she paid him back - in untraceable cash - for the other expenses.  
These two have 2 reasons to claim she paid him back..... First, he essentially lied in his first divorce filings when asked if he had ever paid for gifts for another person.  If he claims that Fani paid hiim back, he can claim he didn't lie.  Secondly, if Fani paid him back with cash, then she can claim she did not benefit from the relationship.  It just so happens that they have zero evidence that she paid him back.  We are just supposed to accept their word, even though they have been less than honest from the get go.

[/quote]

1. Reading comprehension doesn't seem to be your strong suit.  Your own quotes from the policy are about PRE-EXISTING RELATIONSHIPS.  There was no such pre-existing relationship.  Willis barely knew Wade at the outset and only began dating him much later, well after the Country started doing business with him.

2. Burden of proof is on the accuser.   Despite days of testimony there is zero solid or conclusive evidence that she benefitted financially.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics