Legal Experts say Fani has ruined her case against Trump!

Ruined her case? How can there even be a case now when the DA is exposed as a cheater and a crook?

It is her CAREER that ought to be ruined---- such corruption ought to get you disbarred from practicing law, period.
She thought that because this is a Trump case she would never be questioned.
 
No, Moon Bat you are once again confused. The election was not fair. It was stolen by the Democrat scum.
And yet, somehow, in over 60 court appeals, Trump was unable to establish a single piece of evidence to support his Big Lie.

So he threw a coup.

You poor, dumb, willfully stupid, gaslighted rube.
 
1708112360352.png
 
Who is ranting? :71:

Sure sucks to watch all your Trumpian hopes crumbling away under the feckless mishandlings of another crooked affirmative action hired slut.
She was elected as DA for Fulton County, you asswipe.

Really burns your ass, doesn't it? Now choke on that shit sandwich.
 
Only assured if the misconduct directly affects the defendant's case... is what I've read on it.

Some ethics and misconduct issues are reprimanded in various ways as penalty, if there is no conflict and the misconduct was not something egregious.... the rules say they can continue their work loads.
It is when she lies she losses any credibility she had.
 
??? "Numbnuts"???
What's with that, my good fellow?
Why the anger?
Why the ad hominin epithets?

Are you OK, poster Bigr?
-------------------------------------------------

More importantly, for the sincere intentions of this thread:

  1. Can you prove she lied and it was directly related to the evidence?
  2. Directly related to any of the 19 defendants in the case?
  3. Including the 4 (so far) who have plead guilty?
  4. Just exactly what lies are you, Bigr, alleging she made?
  5. And what is the impact on the case overall?

Saddle up, Skippy.
Yes numbnuts
 
No one has yet to explain how Fani's affair has anything to do with serial adulterer Donald Trump's creation of illegal fake electors.

So she might get disqualified. Big deal. That does not eliminate the case against Sore Loser Trump's attempted coup.

And the irony of Trump attacking someone's sex life presents a danger of an irony vortex opening up and swallowing the Universe.
Its simple the coverup is worse then what she did.. with exception that she actually gained wealth off the tax payers something in line with laundering
 
And yet, somehow, in over 60 court appeals, Trump was unable to establish a single piece of evidence to support his Big Lie.

So he threw a coup.

You poor, dumb, willfully stupid, gaslighted rube.
You poor, stupid, retarded piss drinker. Those cases never had evidence allowed. Tossed on sketchy “procedural” grounds. In cases where evidence was allowed, Trump won virtually ALL of them. Back under your bridge you moron.
 
You poor, stupid, retarded piss drinker. Those cases never had evidence allowed. Tossed on sketchy “procedural” grounds. In cases where evidence was allowed, Trump won virtually ALL of them. Back under your bridge you moron.
Gee, why didn't subhuman ape Trump use some of the $250 million he got from your herd & investigate further?

Have the tears stopped flowing yet after today's news? :crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying:
 
1. The Alleged Romantic Relationship Between Willis and Wade

Georgia courts have resoundingly rejected romantic relationships between attorneys as a basis for prosecutorial disqualification. “[T]here is no per se rule of disqualification based on marital status.” Jones v. Jones, 258 Ga. 353, 354–55 (1988); see also Blumenfeld v. Borenstein, 247 Ga. 406, 408, 276 S.E.2d 607, 609 (1981) (“Absent a showing that special circumstances exist which prevent the adequate representation of the client, disqualification based solely on marital status is not justified.”). The Georgia Supreme Court has explained that even married attorneys on opposing sides of litigation do not suffer from a conflict of interest. See Jones, 258 Ga. at 354–355 (“We have found no authority, and none has been cited to us, for the proposition that married lawyers who are involved in active litigation on opposing sides of a case must be disqualified.”). Georgia courts have explained that, “[w]hile we cannot disagree with the proposition that the marital relationship may be the most intimate relationship of a person’s life, it does not follow that professional people allow this intimacy to interfere with professional obligations.” Ventura, 346 Ga. App. at 311, 816 S.E.2d at 154. The opportunity for conflict and potential impropriety between spouses on opposing sides of litigation are greater than those on the same side of a case, working toward the same outcome. Accordingly, there is no plausible argument that non-married attorneys in a romantic relationship who serve together as prosecutors in a case create a conflict of interest for the defendant.
Their relationship has nothing to do with her use of tax dollars to pay her boyfriend!
 
Yes numbnuts
--------------------------------------------

Look, poster Bigr, it is never my avatar's intention to frazzle you or discombobulate your equilibrium. So we are saddened when we read your angry diatribes on this venue. We wish you peace. And we hope that your sense of grievances, temper, and hostile demeanor will not.....do not.....negatively impact your family members.

Good luck. To you. And to them.
 
--------------------------------------------

Look, poster Bigr, it is never my avatar's intention to frazzle you or discombobulate your equilibrium. So we are saddened when we read your angry diatribes on this venue. We wish you peace. And we hope that your sense of grievances, temper, and hostile demeanor will not.....do not.....negatively impact your family members.

Good luck. To you. And to them.
Yes you're a fucking numbnuts
 

Forum List

Back
Top