Willis or Wade must step aside in Trump’s Georgia case, judge rules

[Gunny]

I have an issue with her ethics. However, that not being the question here, I think the judge made the right decision based on the facts presented and his reasoning.

I might see the conflict of interest if she was shacking up with defense counsel.

Fani Willis can stay on Trump's Georgia case if Nathan Wade leaves: Ruling (thehill.com) (https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4529875-fani-willis-ruling-trump-nathan-wade-georgia/)

[Gunny]

READ: Fani Willis disqualification ruling in Trump case (thehill.com) (https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4534307-read-fani-willis-georgia-judge-ruling/)

[Kathianne]

READ: Fani Willis disqualification ruling in Trump case (thehill.com) (https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4534307-read-fani-willis-georgia-judge-ruling/)
Seems the most half assed ruling I've ever seen. I was liking the judge up until this.

[SassyLady]

Judge and his wife are donors to Fanni campaign. Why isn't he called out for bias?

[Kathianne]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/shocking-link-between-judge-mcafee-and-fani-willis/ar-BB1iRWq8

[Gunny]

Seems the most half assed ruling I've ever seen. I was liking the judge up until this.What kind of ruling were you expecting/do you think more appropriate?

[Kathianne]

Both should have been removed. Basically said he thought they both lied, i.e. perjury. Likely financial gain somewhere, overcharging- thus some dismissed prior to ruling. So, "he goes she can stay." Wrong

[Gunny]

Both should have been removed. Basically said he thought they both lied, i.e. perjury. Likely financial gain somewhere, overcharging- thus some dismissed prior to ruling. So, "he goes she can stay." WrongI don't disagree. I'm also weighing that against the case never going to trial. Based on the evidence I have seen to this point, Trump is guilty of trying to commit fraud upon the GA voters. Not a partisan opinion, either. Trying to replace the established electors with your own fraudulent ones doesn't add up to much else.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how, as prosecution, dating an attorney that is part of the prosecution matters. Especially enough to sideshow a criminal trial that we know has an expiration date if Trump wins the election.

That she is a partisan hack and apparently so is the judge has not gone unnoticed, but feel free to point out whatever it is I am missing?

[Kathianne]

I don't disagree. I'm also weighing that against the case never going to trial. Based on the evidence I have seen to this point, Trump is guilty of trying to commit fraud upon the GA voters. Not a partisan opinion, either. Trying to replace the established electors with your own fraudulent ones doesn't add up to much else.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how, as prosecution, dating an attorney that is part of the prosecution matters. Especially enough to sideshow a criminal trial that we know has an expiration date if Trump wins the election.

That she is a partisan hack and apparently so is the judge has not gone unnoticed, but feel free to point out whatever it is I am missing?

I too think this was probably the only case that was worth a damn. That the prosecutor committed so many blunders, starting with anti Trump sentiments, then overcharging, then misconduct puts it all on her. That Trump may benefit, sucks. But, this type of nonsense by prosecutors, doj, etc., just should not be tolerated.

[Gunny]

I too think this was probably the only case that was worth a damn. That the prosecutor committed so many blunders, starting with anti Trump sentiments, then overcharging, then misconduct puts it all on her. That Trump may benefit, sucks. But, this type of nonsense by prosecutors, doj, etc., just should not be tolerated.I have zero faith in our judicial system as it is practiced. In practice, appears to me it is the exact opposite of what was/is intended.

Who you are or aren't is not supposed to have play and it does.