Judge rules Fani Willis can continue

[gounion]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/15/politics ... index.html

I'm not surprised, as I couldn't see any illegal actions at all on Willis' part, and obviously neither could the judge.

Of course, this won't satisfy Glenn, who will continue to attack Willis as Trump directs him to. Because Trump WILL go apoplectic over the ruling as always.

[Toonces]

I think the obvious is that Wade resigns. Trying to find out which will delay the trial the least.

[gounion]

So the right is already going nuts. Glenn will follow the playbook, and of course, attack the judge too as being “in on it” against poor beleaguered Dear Leader. Here’s the thing that Glenn will ignore: To have Willis removed, you have to prove ACTUAL illegal actions. You have to PROVE that she monetarily benefitted, and all they had were accusations, and no proof.

I agree with the judge she used poor judgement - but having an affair between two adults is NOT illegal, it’s an HR issue at most.

It’s funny that Glenn demands Willis be removed for possibly taking a dinner, but Clarence Thomas taking a free RV and lavish vacations on yachts and private jets is just fine.

Let’s be clear about a few things: Fani Willis did not indict Trump and his henchmen - a Grand Jury did. But Glenn has been clear throughout that Donald Trump is completely innocent in regards to January 6th and any election interference and all the cases against him are bogus.

You’re up, Glenn.

[Glennfs]

So the right is already going nuts. Glenn will follow the playbook, and of course, attack the judge too as being “in on it” against poor beleaguered Dear Leader. Here’s the thing that Glenn will ignore: To have Willis removed, you have to prove ACTUAL illegal actions. You have to PROVE that she monetarily benefitted, and all they had were accusations, and no proof.

I agree with the judge she used poor judgement - but having an affair between two adults is NOT illegal, it’s an HR issue at most.

It’s funny that Glenn demands Willis be removed for possibly taking a dinner, but Clarence Thomas taking a free RV and lavish vacations on yachts and private jets is just fine.

Let’s be clear about a few things: Fani Willis did not indict Trump and his henchmen - a Grand Jury did. But Glenn has been clear throughout that Donald Trump is completely innocent in regards to January 6th and any election interference and all the cases against him are bogus.

You’re up, Glenn.

The Willis ruling has nothing to do with January 6th. Again you have no ability to look at anything except through your own very limited prism.
I am surprised that a person with your ability to read and comprehend complex documents has such limited ability comprehending just about everything.

I am fairly sure what I have said is Trump can't be prosecuted for being incompetent. The only provable pre planned illegal event on the 6th was the march from the rally to the capital.
The riot that happened was obviously not pre planned.

So getting to the topic of this thread. During the time when you didn't have the balls to giveva personal opinion you said that you would accept the judge’s ruling.

Now that the judge has ruled do you stand by that statement?

[gounion]

The Willis ruling has nothing to do with January 6th. Again you have no ability to look at anything except through your own very limited prism.
I am surprised that a person with your ability to read and comprehend complex documents has such limited ability comprehending just about everything.

I am fairly sure what I have said is Trump can't be prosecuted for being incompetent. The only provable pre planned illegal event on the 6th was the march from the rally to the capital.
The riot that happened was obviously not pre planned.

So getting to the topic of this thread. During the time when you didn't have the balls to giveva personal opinion you said that you would accept the judge’s ruling.

Now that the judge has ruled do you stand by that statement?

Yep. She did nothing illegal, and Trump didn’t prove that she had an actual conflict of interest, which is what I said. In Georgia, you have to PROVE that, and they certainly did not.

Which this “complex document” ( ) pointed out.

It’s hilarious how you DEMAND that those on our side live their lives to perfection, while there are just no rules at all for your side. All Fani Willis is guilty of is being a human being. She broke no laws at all, and so the judge ruled for her to remain on the case.

This is what Trump does, works to smear anyone that dares to stand up to him.

Like your post about Trump. If you had paid a moment’s attention to the January 6th Committee, it was obviously proven by testimony from Republicans and people on Trump’s administration that it WAS planned.

So go ahead tell us how you WON’T accept the judge’s ruling, and use all of Trump’s talking points.

[Toonces]

You can commit plenty of crimes for things that are not preplanned.

Like, the levels of murder are predicated on the idea.

The riot was pre-planned. Like, you know, seditious conspiracy and the fact they have lots of evidence of preplanning. I mean, lots.

https://www.google.com/search?q=planning+jan+6

(1.5 billion results in .4 seconds. I'm skeptical)

[Glennfs]

So the right is already going nuts. Glenn will follow the playbook, and of course, attack the judge too as being “in on it” against poor beleaguered Dear Leader. Here’s the thing that Glenn will ignore: To have Willis removed, you have to prove ACTUAL illegal actions. You have to PROVE that she monetarily benefitted, and all they had were accusations, and no proof.

I agree with the judge she used poor judgement - but having an affair between two adults is NOT illegal, it’s an HR issue at most.

It’s funny that Glenn demands Willis be removed for possibly taking a dinner, but Clarence Thomas taking a free RV and lavish vacations on yachts and private jets is just fine.

Let’s be clear about a few things: Fani Willis did not indict Trump and his henchmen - a Grand Jury did. But Glenn has been clear throughout that Donald Trump is completely innocent in regards to January 6th and any election interference and all the cases against him are bogus.

You’re up, Glenn.

I agree with the judge's ruling however she did nor come away unscathed. I get a kick how you've been claiming that this clears her of any criminal charges. Everyone here even you know that this was not a criminal investigation it was an ethics investigation.
I also like how you keep ignoring that she paid her boyfriend 650k and keep referring to a few dinners.
I bet in their private thoughts the other liberals here are embarrassed by your blatant hypocrisy.

Finally I am pleased to see you agree with the judge abd believe the entire ordeal had an idor of mendacity. I never thought you would admit that.

[gounion]

I agree with the judge's ruling however she did nor come away unscathed. I get a kick how you've been claiming that this clears her of any criminal charges. Everyone here even you know that this was not a criminal investigation it was an ethics investigation.
I also like how you keep ignoring that she paid her boyfriend 650k and keep referring to a few dinners.
I bet in their private thoughts the other liberals here are embarrassed by your blatant hypocrisy.

Finally I am pleased to see you agree with the judge abd believe the entire ordeal had an idor of mendacity. I never thought you would admit that.

As usual, you are wrong. Having a monetary conflict of interest is illegal. Breaking the law. But to be removed, they would have to PROVE there was an actual monetary conflict. Of course, like every other Trump smear, he had no proof, though he swore he did.

She was cleared of that charge.

And there is no proof that he was her boyfriend when she hired him, but, like Trump, you don’t care about facts, you just love to make shit up and pretend it’s fact.

So it’s you that refuses to agree with the judge. I predicted that, of course.

[Glennfs]

As usual, you are wrong. Having a monetary conflict of interest is illegal. Breaking the law. But to be removed, they would have to PROVE there was an actual monetary conflict. Of course, like every other Trump smear, he had no proof, though he swore he did.

She was cleared of that charge.

And there is no proof that he was her boyfriend when she hired him, but, like Trump, you don’t care about facts, you just love to make shit up and pretend it’s fact.

So it’s you that refuses to agree with the judge. I predicted that, of course.

So you are believing their story that the phones being in the same place at the same time was a coincidence.
Come on man for once try and not be a hypocrite.
I agree with the judge but you do know this was a ethics investigation not a criminal investigation.

Here is a great summary of the ruling from WAPO


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/a- ... r-BB1jYhOL

[gounion]

So you are believing their story that the phones being in the same place at the same time was a coincidence.
Come on man for once try and not be a hypocrite.
I agree with the judge but you do know this was a ethics investigation not a criminal investigation.

Here is a great summary of the ruling from WAPO


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/a- ... r-BB1jYhOL

No evidence was presented in court. Supposed phone evidence wasn’t allowed. I would question whether it was, first, obtained legally, or second, tampered with or otherwise falsified.

Again, I knew it wouldn’t stop you from smearing her.

[Glennfs]

No evidence was presented in court. Supposed phone evidence wasn’t allowed. I would question whether it was, first, obtained legally, or second, tampered with or otherwise falsified.

Again, I knew it wouldn’t stop you from smearing her.

Did you read the link and all the judge had to say. I know in your private thoughts you know thet were lying under oath about their relationship.

They followed his cell phone from his home to hers. Then 5 hours later back again multiple times.

Why play pretend? If you don't believe there was anything wrong with them being in a relationship and her paying him 650k that would be fine.

But to make yourself out to be so stupid that you ignore the obvious, ignore what the judge had to say and pretend it was all just made up is ridiculous.

Again making you the liberal equivalent of a Trumper

[gounion]

Did you read the link and all the judge had to say. I know in your private thoughts you know thet were lying under oath about their relationship.

They followed his cell phone from his home to hers. Then 5 hours later back again multiple times.

Why play pretend? If you don't believe there was anything wrong with them being in a relationship and her paying him 650k that would be fine.

But to make yourself out to be so stupid that you ignore the obvious, ignore what the judge had to say and pretend it was all just made up is ridiculous.

Again making you the liberal equivalent of a Trumper

Show me where in the court case that the cell phone records were introduced. They were not. Don’t have to prove your “evidence” is real or legally obtained in a sham State Senate hearing.

Again, as far as the relationship, that was legal, they are both consenting adults. Funny how Trump can pay off porn stars and it’s fine, but two single people having a relationship, in your mind, means they are both disqualified from anything in the future.

I don’t believe she did anything wrong in her relationship. But Trump loves a good smear, and you do too, don’t you?

[gounion]

Did you read the link and all the judge had to say. I know in your private thoughts you know thet were lying under oath about their relationship.

They followed his cell phone from his home to hers. Then 5 hours later back again multiple times.

Why play pretend? If you don't believe there was anything wrong with them being in a relationship and her paying him 650k that would be fine.

But to make yourself out to be so stupid that you ignore the obvious, ignore what the judge had to say and pretend it was all just made up is ridiculous.

Again making you the liberal equivalent of a Trumper

Show me where in the court case that the cell phone records were introduced. They were not. Don’t have to prove your “evidence” is real or legally obtained in a sham State Senate hearing.

Again, as far as the relationship, that was legal, they are both consenting adults. Funny how Trump can pay off porn stars and it’s fine, but two single people having a relationship, in your mind, means they are both disqualified from anything in the future.

I don’t believe she did anything wrong in her relationship. But Trump loves a good smear, and you do too, don’t you?

[Glennfs]

Show me where in the court case that the cell phone records were introduced. They were not. Don’t have to prove your “evidence” is real or legally obtained in a sham State Senate hearing.

Again, as far as the relationship, that was legal, they are both consenting adults. Funny how Trump can pay off porn stars and it’s fine, but two single people having a relationship, in your mind, means they are both disqualified from anything in the future.

I don’t believe she did anything wrong in her relationship. But Trump loves a good smear, and you do too, don’t you?

This is not about Trump’s corruption it is about Willis.

[Glennfs]

Show me where in the court case that the cell phone records were introduced. They were not. Don’t have to prove your “evidence” is real or legally obtained in a sham State Senate hearing.

Again, as far as the relationship, that was legal, they are both consenting adults. Funny how Trump can pay off porn stars and it’s fine, but two single people having a relationship, in your mind, means they are both disqualified from anything in the future.

I don’t believe she did anything wrong in her relationship. But Trump loves a good smear, and you do too, don’t you?

Why it's just a coincidence right?


https://www.wral.com/story/cellphone-da ... ationship/

[gounion]

Why it's just a coincidence right?


https://www.wral.com/story/cellphone-da ... ationship/

Apparently the judge thought so. You're doing JUST what I said you would.

Anything to deflect for Dear Leader. Let's be clear: It was a Grand Jury that indicted him and his minions. But that pisses you off, doesn't it? Is it because he can't be pardoned from state charges?

[bengal59]

Show me where in the court case that the cell phone records were introduced. They were not. Don’t have to prove your “evidence” is real or legally obtained in a sham State Senate hearing.

Again, as far as the relationship, that was legal, they are both consenting adults. Funny how Trump can pay off porn stars and it’s fine, but two single people having a relationship, in your mind, means they are both disqualified from anything in the future.

I don’t believe she did anything wrong in her relationship. But Trump loves a good smear, and you do too, don’t you?

You also forget that this wasn't a "pure as the driven snow" white man who was accused of this. It was an "uppity" black woman who didn't know her place and had the balls to back sass her betters on the witness stand. And of course according to the redneck hillbillies in MAGA world, they are all whores anyway!

[Glennfs]

Apparently the judge thought so. You're doing JUST what I said you would.

Anything to deflect for Dear Leader. Let's be clear: It was a Grand Jury that indicted him and his minions. But that pisses you off, doesn't it? Is it because he can't be pardoned from state charges?

So what is your personal opinion about the phone

[Glennfs]

You also forget that this wasn't a "pure as the driven snow" white man who was accused of this. It was an "uppity" black woman who didn't know her place and had the balls to back sass her betters on the witness stand. And of course according to the redneck hillbillies in MAGA world, they are all whores anyway!

Oh look another racist liberal imagine that. Thank you for whitespaining

[Glennfs]

Delete

[Glennfs]

[quote=Glennfs post_id=83857 time=1710668202 delete

[gounion]

So what is your personal opinion about the phone

First, did Fani Willis do anything illegal? Yes or no?

Second, did Donald Trump and his minions do anything illegal, yes or no?

[Glennfs]

First, did Fani Willis do anything illegal? Yes or no?

Second, did Donald Trump and his minions do anything illegal, yes or no?

We don't know yet because there hasn't been a criminal investigation. The judge did say she was still subject to investigations by the bar association and state of Georgia.

Yes Trump did many illegal things. As for the Georgia case thar will be up to a jury and the appeal courts to decide .

Now what is your personal opinion about the phone records.

[gounion]

We don't know yet because there hasn't been a criminal investigation. The judge did say she was still subject to investigations by the bar association and state of Georgia.

Yes Trump did many illegal things. As for the Georgia case thar will be up to a jury and the appeal courts to decide .

Now what is your personal opinion about the phone records.

I don't have an opinion. I don't know if they are real or not - they came from Donald Trump. That makes them very suspect. It's obvious the judge didn't believe them as fact. It's what Trump does - throws lies up and hopes the gullible - you know, people like you - believe them.

But this isn't about the DA - it's about crimes committed in Georgia, and the indictments came from a Grand Jury.

[Glennfs]

I don't have an opinion. I don't know if they are real or not - they came from Donald Trump. That makes them very suspect. It's obvious the judge didn't believe them as fact. It's what Trump does - throws lies up and hopes the gullible - you know, people like you - believe them.

But this isn't about the DA - it's about crimes committed in Georgia, and the indictments came from a Grand Jury.

So the DA lying under oath is ok with you.