Trump co-defendant Michael Roman accused Willis of misconduct for her “clandestine” relationship with Nathan Wade, whom she appointed as special counsel.
Honestly, this is probably the best outcome that could come out of this. I don’t think she did anything wrong since they were both on the same side of the case, but I think it was obvious that some sort of discipline about appropriate behavior would come down and Fani Willis gets to keep prosecuting Trump, which is the most important part.
It’s crazy how Americans find it proper to meddle in people’s private life, when there is no conflict of interest. But when there actually is a conflict, it doesn’t matter as long as it’s republicans. And that’s even for the highest court in the country, which is so fucked up compromised it should be dismantled altogether. But instead they are allowed to dismantle decades of progress, and maybe even democracy itself.
I’d go crazy if I lived in USA, just reading about it over here in EU, can almost drive you crazy.
Your vote, and those of the minority party in your area, give hope. They give those who are nervous to disagree proof that people can stand by their morals and disagree with the majority. You show people in that community who align with you that they are not alone. That there are others who think like them.
Keep voting, even if you lose. Because it lets everyone know that your political opinions and desires aren’t gone.
If you are in Canada, it may possibly be slightly better here, I live in Denmark, but at least I live in the best part regarding weather, although the difference isn’t huge here, because Denmark is such a small country. ;)
No, it’s very obvious that republicans are way more corrupt and without conscience than democrats. Which makes sense, because you kind of need to be a sociopath to be republican.
There is more here than just a personal life complication. The person she was with used funds from the case to pay for personal vacations. This is about his use of government funds for personal use while being involved in a case against the highest government official (at the time of offense). While I don’t think it had any impact on the case and shouldn’t delay the case in any way, I don’t think either of them should be kept on the case.
My understanding is that he used prosecution travel funds for personal travel. So he was hired by the government to do a job and was given travel funds as part of that contract, but he misused those funds. That’s a big no-no for government contracting. You aren’t even supposed to expense alcohol while on business trips funded by government contracts, let alone use those funds for personal travel.
I don’t think it’s embezzlement, but it probably rises to the level of “Fraud, Waste, and Abuse.”
The problematic thing that the defense will point out is that the prosecution is knowingly benefiting from trying a high level case, and therefore is biased towards making that case go to court even if it doesn’t merit it.
If what you write is true, he should be thrown out on his ass, that’s what we would do here. He would never be able to work for government again, and probably lose his right to work as an attorney, as he has shown himself unable to live up to the standards expected. Corruption is unacceptable.
But I still kind of doubt your version, because if that’s true, hoe come it’s either him or her, if he was the one doing the shady things, it should be him?
That’s the thing, the judge has an obligation to be fair, and the Prosecution needs to have all their bases covered because the defense is presumed innocent until they are proven guilty. This means that the defense often gets the benefit of the doubt when things like this pop up, to make sure nothing can happen to overturn any guilty verdict that comes down.
And this DA knows all that, knows how tight her cases need to be in order to stick. So engaging in this relationship in the first place was a poor choice. It should never have happened, and I think she knows that.
WTF!!!
Honestly, this is probably the best outcome that could come out of this. I don’t think she did anything wrong since they were both on the same side of the case, but I think it was obvious that some sort of discipline about appropriate behavior would come down and Fani Willis gets to keep prosecuting Trump, which is the most important part.
It’s crazy how Americans find it proper to meddle in people’s private life, when there is no conflict of interest. But when there actually is a conflict, it doesn’t matter as long as it’s republicans. And that’s even for the highest court in the country, which is so fucked up compromised it should be dismantled altogether. But instead they are allowed to dismantle decades of progress, and maybe even democracy itself.
I’d go crazy if I lived in USA, just reading about it over here in EU, can almost drive you crazy.
deleted by creator
Your vote, and those of the minority party in your area, give hope. They give those who are nervous to disagree proof that people can stand by their morals and disagree with the majority. You show people in that community who align with you that they are not alone. That there are others who think like them.
Keep voting, even if you lose. Because it lets everyone know that your political opinions and desires aren’t gone.
i’d say “try living next to them” but the weather is probably nicer where you are :)
If you are in Canada, it may possibly be slightly better here, I live in Denmark, but at least I live in the best part regarding weather, although the difference isn’t huge here, because Denmark is such a small country. ;)
It’s more that the democrats at least pretend to care, so they throw a sacrifice every now and then.
No, it’s very obvious that republicans are way more corrupt and without conscience than democrats. Which makes sense, because you kind of need to be a sociopath to be republican.
Did I say they weren’t?
Yes you did, when you write democrats only pretend and only now and then sacrifice someone for show.
That’s making a false equivalence.
That’s not a false equivalency, I believe that most of them are just reskinned republicans who want power.
There are a few good ones, but there are a ton more who are fine with just sending bombs to help kill babies.
There is more here than just a personal life complication. The person she was with used funds from the case to pay for personal vacations. This is about his use of government funds for personal use while being involved in a case against the highest government official (at the time of offense). While I don’t think it had any impact on the case and shouldn’t delay the case in any way, I don’t think either of them should be kept on the case.
So he got paid and used his money like everyone else would? Or was there something wrong with his payment?
If you are talking embezzlement, I think he would go to jail for that, he certainly wouldn’t be allowed to work as a lawyer.
My understanding is that he used prosecution travel funds for personal travel. So he was hired by the government to do a job and was given travel funds as part of that contract, but he misused those funds. That’s a big no-no for government contracting. You aren’t even supposed to expense alcohol while on business trips funded by government contracts, let alone use those funds for personal travel.
I don’t think it’s embezzlement, but it probably rises to the level of “Fraud, Waste, and Abuse.”
The problematic thing that the defense will point out is that the prosecution is knowingly benefiting from trying a high level case, and therefore is biased towards making that case go to court even if it doesn’t merit it.
If what you write is true, he should be thrown out on his ass, that’s what we would do here. He would never be able to work for government again, and probably lose his right to work as an attorney, as he has shown himself unable to live up to the standards expected. Corruption is unacceptable.
But I still kind of doubt your version, because if that’s true, hoe come it’s either him or her, if he was the one doing the shady things, it should be him?
That’s the thing, the judge has an obligation to be fair, and the Prosecution needs to have all their bases covered because the defense is presumed innocent until they are proven guilty. This means that the defense often gets the benefit of the doubt when things like this pop up, to make sure nothing can happen to overturn any guilty verdict that comes down.
And this DA knows all that, knows how tight her cases need to be in order to stick. So engaging in this relationship in the first place was a poor choice. It should never have happened, and I think she knows that.
This, 100%. Even when a case seems won, don’t give your opponent anything to muddy the water. I hope she owns this mistake and tightens her process.