Would You Prefer that Fanni Willis Simply Resign from the Trump Case?

[Seymour Flops]

From The Hill:

How could the district attorney of Fulton County, Ga., hire a friend with no major prosecutorial experience to handle one of the strongest cases against Donald Trump — thus putting the entire case in jeopardy? That question surfaced last week when Mike Roman, one of those charged along with Trump for election fraud in Georgia, accused DA Fani Willis of improperly hiring a romantic partner, Nathan Wade, as special prosecutor for the Trump case and financially benefiting from his appointment through luxury vacations they’ve taken together on his dime. Roman has filed papers demanding that the entire prosecution team be disqualified and the case against him and Trump be dismissed.

. . .

But, but, but — you can’t deny that the whole deal looks bad and carries a strong odor of political and personal favoritism. Wade may be, as Willis calls him, a Georgia legal “superstar.” But if she went outside state government to hire her boyfriend as special prosecutor, it was a monumental case of bad judgment on her part.

Even though there doesn’t appear to be anything that links her misconduct to the case against Trump, it raises serious questions of conflict of interest. And, worse yet, it gives the Trump camp more ammunition to fuel their phony claim that criminal charges against him are nothing but a political witch hunt.

This is not some Trump-friendly news outlet. This is a publication that is willing to throw away journalistic ethics to state their opinion as fact.

Yet, even they can see that Fanni "me so horny" Willis has become a liability.

What say you, Democrats? I said about Santos, "the quicker he resigns the better." Can you say the same about Willis?

 

[JGalt]

The Trump Curse strikes again. Fani is washed up, she'll never work in that business again.

 

[Crepitus]

Would You Prefer that Fanni Willis Simply Resign from the Trump Case?​

Why?

 

[White 6]

From The Hill:

How could the district attorney of Fulton County, Ga., hire a friend with no major prosecutorial experience to handle one of the strongest cases against Donald Trump — thus putting the entire case in jeopardy? That question surfaced last week when Mike Roman, one of those charged along with Trump for election fraud in Georgia, accused DA Fani Willis of improperly hiring a romantic partner, Nathan Wade, as special prosecutor for the Trump case and financially benefiting from his appointment through luxury vacations they’ve taken together on his dime. Roman has filed papers demanding that the entire prosecution team be disqualified and the case against him and Trump be dismissed.

. . .

But, but, but — you can’t deny that the whole deal looks bad and carries a strong odor of political and personal favoritism. Wade may be, as Willis calls him, a Georgia legal “superstar.” But if she went outside state government to hire her boyfriend as special prosecutor, it was a monumental case of bad judgment on her part.

Even though there doesn’t appear to be anything that links her misconduct to the case against Trump, it raises serious questions of conflict of interest. And, worse yet, it gives the Trump camp more ammunition to fuel their phony claim that criminal charges against him are nothing but a political witch hunt.

This is not some Trump-friendly news outlet. This is a publication that is willing to throw away journalistic ethics to state their opinion as fact.

Yet, even they can see that Fanni "me so horny" Willis has become a liability.

What say you, Democrats? I said about Santos, "the quicker he resigns the better." Can you say the same about Willis?

Nah. Lets see if she wins or loses the Trump case.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Nah. Lets see if she wins or loses the Trump case.

That's fine for me, I want her to lose, and she surely will if she stays on the case.

There's no way the jury isn't hearing about her thinking with her crotch instead of her brain. All it takes is one Trumper on the jury to mock her and convince the others to acquit.

 

[White 6]

That's fine for me, I want her to lose, and she surely will if she stays on the case.

There's no way the jury isn't hearing about her thinking with her crotch instead of her brain. All it takes is one Trumper on the jury to mock her and convince the others to acquit.

So, you don't think they will consider the evidence, but decide based on evidence or heresay not related to trump and the charges? You have no faith in jurors to carry out their duties, do you?

 

[DGS49]

It is important to present this case to a jury, in public, and for the defense to make its case.

It is a bullshit prosecution that would never have been brought against a Democrat for identical acts and communications. In fact, such communications are universal in closely-decided elections. "Finding" votes is not the same as - not even close to - MANUFACTURING votes [which is what Democrats normally do].

Let it play out. The public needs to see how low the Democrats have gone to remove the clear electoral choice of HALF OF AMERICA.

 

[BULLDOG]

From The Hill:

How could the district attorney of Fulton County, Ga., hire a friend with no major prosecutorial experience to handle one of the strongest cases against Donald Trump — thus putting the entire case in jeopardy? That question surfaced last week when Mike Roman, one of those charged along with Trump for election fraud in Georgia, accused DA Fani Willis of improperly hiring a romantic partner, Nathan Wade, as special prosecutor for the Trump case and financially benefiting from his appointment through luxury vacations they’ve taken together on his dime. Roman has filed papers demanding that the entire prosecution team be disqualified and the case against him and Trump be dismissed.

. . .

But, but, but — you can’t deny that the whole deal looks bad and carries a strong odor of political and personal favoritism. Wade may be, as Willis calls him, a Georgia legal “superstar.” But if she went outside state government to hire her boyfriend as special prosecutor, it was a monumental case of bad judgment on her part.

Even though there doesn’t appear to be anything that links her misconduct to the case against Trump, it raises serious questions of conflict of interest. And, worse yet, it gives the Trump camp more ammunition to fuel their phony claim that criminal charges against him are nothing but a political witch hunt.

This is not some Trump-friendly news outlet. This is a publication that is willing to throw away journalistic ethics to state their opinion as fact.

Yet, even they can see that Fanni "me so horny" Willis has become a liability.

What say you, Democrats? I said about Santos, "the quicker he resigns the better." Can you say the same about Willis?

You MAGA cult members will pitch a tantrum over anything, won't you? Unless she is humping the guy in court, her romantic involvement has nothing to do with trump's charges,

 

[Rawley]

You MAGA cult members will pitch a tantrum over anything, won't you? Unless she is humping the guy in court, her romantic involvement has nothing to do with trump's charges,

You hope.

 

[JGalt]

You MAGA cult members will pitch a tantrum over anything, won't you? Unless she is humping the guy in court, her romantic involvement has nothing to do with trump's charges,

This like every other phony case is coming apart, just like you will come apart on January 20, 2025.

And I'll be here to enjoy it.

 

[BULLDOG]

You hope.

Unless you can come up with some credible proof that her romantic life has any effect on proof of trump's guilt, you got nothing. How long is that list of your silly accusations without any proof now?

 

[BULLDOG]

This like every other phony case is coming apart, just like you will come apart on January 20, 2025.

And I'll be here to enjoy it.

Cases coming apart? You've ben listening to fox again, haven't you

 

[Rawley]

Unless you can come up with some credible proof that her romantic life has any effect on proof of trump's guilt, you got nothing. How long is that list of your silly accusations without any proof now?

Did she hire her fuckbuddy for his experience? Or because he wouldn't question her unprecedented application of the RICO statute?

 

[BULLDOG]

Did she hire her fuckbuddy for his experience? Or because he wouldn't question her unprecedented application of the RICO statute?

Doesn't matter what he might have questioned. It was her call to make. You got a problem with every other person on her team that doesn't publicly question her?

 

[Rawley]

Doesn't matter what he might have questioned. It was her call to make. You got a problem with every other person on her team that doesn't publicly question her?

LOL Y'all should be the ones pitching a fit. Her fuckbuddy has zero experience with RICO cases. Zero. He has one year experience as a prosecutor - twenty years ago.

 

[BULLDOG]

LOL Y'all should be the ones pitching a fit. Her fuckbuddy has zero experience with RICO cases. Zero. He has one year experience as a prosecutor - twenty years ago.

So? He seems to be doing OK. Sorry, but I just can't get as upset about that as much as you seem to want me to.

 

[Rawley]

So? He seems to be doing OK. Sorry, but I just can't get as upset about that as much as you seem to want me to.

Didn't expect you to get upset at all. The only thing you care about in this is getting Trump. By any means necessary, right? Laws, corruption, due process, fairness be damned.

 

[westwall]

From The Hill:

How could the district attorney of Fulton County, Ga., hire a friend with no major prosecutorial experience to handle one of the strongest cases against Donald Trump — thus putting the entire case in jeopardy? That question surfaced last week when Mike Roman, one of those charged along with Trump for election fraud in Georgia, accused DA Fani Willis of improperly hiring a romantic partner, Nathan Wade, as special prosecutor for the Trump case and financially benefiting from his appointment through luxury vacations they’ve taken together on his dime. Roman has filed papers demanding that the entire prosecution team be disqualified and the case against him and Trump be dismissed.

. . .

But, but, but — you can’t deny that the whole deal looks bad and carries a strong odor of political and personal favoritism. Wade may be, as Willis calls him, a Georgia legal “superstar.” But if she went outside state government to hire her boyfriend as special prosecutor, it was a monumental case of bad judgment on her part.

Even though there doesn’t appear to be anything that links her misconduct to the case against Trump, it raises serious questions of conflict of interest. And, worse yet, it gives the Trump camp more ammunition to fuel their phony claim that criminal charges against him are nothing but a political witch hunt.

This is not some Trump-friendly news outlet. This is a publication that is willing to throw away journalistic ethics to state their opinion as fact.

Yet, even they can see that Fanni "me so horny" Willis has become a liability.

What say you, Democrats? I said about Santos, "the quicker he resigns the better." Can you say the same about Willis?

No, that unethical, corrupt bitch needs to be in prison. She stole taxpayer money to fund her lavish lifestyle.

 

[Seymour Flops]

So, you don't think they will consider the evidence, but decide based on evidence or heresay not related to trump and the charges? You have no faith in jurors to carry out their duties, do you?

I would hope that the jurors would only consider the evidence, or more to the point, the lack of evidence of any criminality on Trump's part. If they did, acquital would be assured.

But if jurors only went by evidence, the grand jury would not have indicted in the first place. Read the indictment. Instead of saying "Defendant violated section blah-blah of criminal code whatsis, based on x and y evidence," Willis just recited a list of things trump did and put "criminally" in front of them. Really childish, like middle schoolers putting on a pay about a trial.

The trial is motivated, not by evidence, but by a mix of politics, emotion, and mental instability known as Trump Derangement Syndrome. If the jurors are sufferers, they might want to convict Trump. But one reasonable jury could snap them out of it, by pointing out the flaws in the very people who are claiming the moral high ground on Trump.

 

[BULLDOG]

I would hope that the jurors would only consider the evidence, or more to the point, the lack of evidence of any criminality on Trump's part. If they did, acquital would be assured.

But if jurors only went by evidence, the grand jury would not have indicted in the first place. Read the indictment. Instead of saying "Defendant violated section blah-blah of criminal code whatsis, based on x and y evidence," Willis just recited a list of things trump did and put "criminally" in front of them. Really childish, like middle schoolers putting on a pay about a trial.

The trial is motivated, not by evidence, but by a mix of politics, emotion, and mental instability known as Trump Derangement Syndrome. If the jurors are sufferers, they might want to convict Trump. But one reasonable jury could snap them out of it, by pointing out the flaws in the very people who are claiming the moral high ground on Trump.

You think the things presented to the Grand Jury weren't crimes, because you didn't like the way they were worded? Do you think the Grand Jury indicted him for things that weren't against the law? You're pretty goofy, aren't you?