Well there you go, nothing to worry about.He may have a small problem, a Fox poll said 35% of republicans in NH would not vote for trump if he’s the nominee.
Except for red state officials that don’t believe in the rule of law.Well there you go, nothing to worry about.
That was a well written article, though what I got out of it wasn't anything like your conclusions.You may enjoy this:
A Reality Check on the Fani Willis Scandal
Is Trump’s Georgia prosecution about to get derailed?www.politico.com
What it comes down to, looks like to me, is that only he or she who is without sin should be allowed to judge and that therefor any who take on a prosecutorial role can be judged unworthy of of that job because they whose job it is to prevent corrupt prosecution will not fail to apply that rule to themselves. Meanwhile, as the legal games are played by the rich and the cunning, Trump will go free even though everyone knows he is guilty. This is what happens when Caesar is a liberal. Conservatives criminals know how he can be played.
Any who judge against Mega are sinners themselves because only sinners judge.
Ok?Except for red state officials that don’t believe in the rule of law.
I'd be happy, but they are lying to themselves. My mother (for example) was hoping the RNC delegates would do their job and disqualify Trump as the Republican nominee in 2016. She knew he was terrible. Once he was the nominee, and the choice was Mussolini or a Democrat, Mussolini all the way baby.He may have a small problem, a Fox poll said 35% of republicans in NH would not vote for trump if he’s the nominee.
I thought you would like it. It expressed the same ethical stance I believe you are taking, that appearances are important to how we evaluate any suspicions someone being charged with something might be getting a raw deal.That was a well written article, though what I got out of it wasn't anything like your conclusions.
We'll have answers in a few weeks. I don't mind waiting.
My view is far simpler. She hired a subcontractor to prosecute what is arguably the highest profile case in a decade. In that case, every step has to be circumspect. Now she's accused of impropriety, and as far as I know, she hasn't deigned the claim. She's either innocent or stupid. If she's clean then it's time to move forward, if she's done something stupid then the question becomes, has she done anything else that's stupid? In that case, everything has to be reviewed.I thought you would like it. It expressed the same ethical stance I believe you are taking, that appearances are important to how we evaluate any suspicions someone being charged with something might be getting a raw deal.
My point is that such suspicions in a partisan world can always be manufactured owing to the fact that partisan sensibility is the product of feelings of victimization. Enough noise from a large enough collection or cult of such so called victims and real justicegoes right out the window. Appearances, how we see the lord, is based on feelings and we do not know what we feel.
Self haters are victims of abuse they suppress and project onto the outside world. All Stockholm victims root for those like who did them in. Their feelings about what Justice is are completely up side down.
To die to the ego self is to kill the sacred within. The sacred is a monster. We identified with the monster to survive. This is why you did not see what I did in the link. You see the monster out there or you see it within. The monster was a friend you no longer need. Love you
Let me add that simple is sometimes good just in case my use of the term 'low level thinking' has completely negative connotations A conservative mind will have run up a tree before a liberal one can decide if the noise in the bush is a charging water buffalo. Sometimes that's what the sound is. Of course where inappropriate, sometimes the conservative will fall out of the tree a haste to escape.My view is far simpler. She hired a subcontractor to prosecute what is arguably the highest profile case in a decade. In that case, every step has to be circumspect. Now she's accused of impropriety, and as far as I know, she hasn't deigned the claim. She's either innocent or stupid. If she's clean then it's time to move forward, if she's done something stupid then the question becomes, has she done anything else that's stupid? In that case, everything has to be reviewed.
since you are using the subcontractor angle, lets ask you this: If your wife hires a subcontractor to remodel her's and your house, which you are doing because the city is requiring it to get your house up to code, and you find out later that your wife has been getting boned by said subcontractor. And it started before she hired him to remodel the house.. Are you saying that because your wife was being boned by the subcontractor, you have to go thru and review all of his work on your house, to ensure the boning didn't bone your remodel? Even though the boning has nothing to do with his craftmenship, or the city requiring your to do the remodeling?My view is far simpler. She hired a subcontractor to prosecute what is arguably the highest profile case in a decade. In that case, every step has to be circumspect. Now she's accused of impropriety, and as far as I know, she hasn't deigned the claim. She's either innocent or stupid. If she's clean then it's time to move forward, if she's done something stupid then the question becomes, has she done anything else that's stupid? In that case, everything has to be reviewed.
Good detailed article explaining how this is basically nothing but BS.
Don’t fall for the trumped-up charges against Fani Willis
The Georgia election interference case is at risk of becoming yet another example of GOP diversionwww.salon.com
In the Trump era, Republicans have developed a dark but effective strategy to deflect from his staggering criminality. They appear willing to lodge any complaint or investigation, without an underlying good faith basis in law or fact, against any Democrat to create false equivalencies for Trump’s many felony charges. The noise from their constant false allegations produces the desired effect of minimizing Trump’s crimes in the court of public opinion, leading exhausted voters to tune out and lump together all politicians facing legal charges.
we really need a sad emote response, because i hate that you are most likely correct.Yup, the most important point being that, prior to hiring Wade, Willis attempted to hire two other local attorneys to handle the case and both declined (due to being afraid of violence from Trump supporters). That and the fact that she also hired two other attorneys in addition to Wade, and all were paid the same, is pretty much the end of the matter. She obviously didn't hire him because they were involved, he was paid the same as the others, and there is no conflict of interest because they're on the same side.
Article is correct that they are doing exactly this:
So far I'd say it's working.
since you are using the subcontractor angle, lets ask you this: If your wife hires a subcontractor to remodel her's and your house, which you are doing because the city is requiring it to get your house up to code, and you find out later that your wife has been getting boned by said subcontractor. And it started before she hired him to remodel the house.. Are you saying that because your wife was being boned by the subcontractor, you have to go thru and review all of his work on your house, to ensure the boning didn't bone your remodel? Even though the boning has nothing to do with his craftmenship, or the city requiring your to do the remodeling?
Actually there are even some supporters of DA Willis who recognize that this is a bad development for the RICO case. Below I'll link a guest opinion from a Georgia State law professor, Clark D. Cunningham.we really need a sad emote response, because i hate that you are most likely correct.
If, in mid-February, Judge McAfee grants Mr. Roman’s motion right away and applies the motion to the other defendants, it could bring the entire case to a halt, because under Georgia law, if a district attorney is disqualified, so is the entire staff of the district attorney’s office. Her stepping aside would forestall her disqualification.
No need. To be a Trump supporter you have to be infected with a deep sense of betrayal which we all all actually feel since we were all made to hate ourselves and that is nothing but betrayal. We were meant to feel we were created in God's image since that is what we originally were intended to strive to become. But instead we soon learned that any attempt in that direction would bring down the house on us. Those who were most betrayed with little left to counter the feeling are primed to suspect the worst from everyone and since the mental illness of self hate is universal, there are multitudes who do not have any psychic resources to doubt that feeling. Such people are ripe to believe their Stockholm Syndrome god is getting the shaft from the left, that justice itself is perverted.Assuming the allegations are 100% true, I'm at a complete loss how hiring an underqualified attorney for a complex criminal RICO prosecution hurts any of the defendants in any way. Someone please explain the alleged conflict of interest to me.
Make no doubt about-the ultimate goal of the defense is to force the removal of a proven tough and very effective DA who is very experienced in RICO cases. And they will throw any dirt at the wall they can. I note her the moving defendant submitted absolutely no affidavits or other purported factual support for his motion.
I'm worried only about what effect it has on the litigation. It has already been proven over and over again true believers will never doubt His Worship. Look at the hundreds of proven lies he has told (starting with "The Mexicans will pay for the wall") and, among other things, convicted of running a fraudulent "university" that scammed students, parents and probably the fed government I assume (thru guaranteed student loans) and there has been hardly a blip in his support.No need. To be a Trump supporter you have to be infected with a deep sense of betrayal which we all all actually feel since we were all made to hate ourselves and that is nothing but betrayal. We were meant to feel we were created in God's image since that is what we originally were intended to strive to become. But instead we soon learned that any attempt in that direction would bring down the house on us. Those who were most betrayed with little left to counter the feeling are primed to suspect the worst from everyone and since the mental illness of self hate is universal, there are multitudes who do not have any psychic resources to doubt that feeling. Such people are ripe to believe their Stockholm Syndrome god is getting the shaft from the left, that justice itself is perverted.
There was an article somewhere that indicated he was Willis third choice; the first two choices declined to take the case (probably because of the crap trump would throw at them).Assuming the allegations are 100% true, I'm at a complete loss how hiring an underqualified attorney for a complex criminal RICO prosecution hurts any of the defendants in any way. Someone please explain the alleged conflict of interest to me.
Make no doubt about-the ultimate goal of the defense is to force the removal of a proven tough and very effective DA who is very experienced in RICO cases. And they will throw any dirt at the wall they can. I note her the moving defendant submitted absolutely no affidavits or other purported factual support for his motion.
Part of the rumour is they spent money meant for the investigation on expensive pleasure trips.Anyone come up with a rule or law Fani broke?
Lol and this invalidates the charges how?Part of the rumour is they spent money meant for the investigation on expensive pleasure trips.
Black woman going after the white man?Anyone come up with a rule or law Fani broke?