Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Fani Willis misconduct hearing

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by cocodrilo, Feb 15, 2024.

  1. gatormonk

    gatormonk GC Hall of Fame

    8,368
    7,481
    2,803
    Apr 3, 2007
    What's the title of the thread?
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  2. citygator

    citygator VIP Member

    12,188
    2,649
    3,303
    Apr 3, 2007
    Charlotte
    I am 100% impressed by Trump’s tolerance for losing. It is definitely something to marvel.
     
    Last edited: Feb 23, 2024
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. gatormonk

    gatormonk GC Hall of Fame

    8,368
    7,481
    2,803
    Apr 3, 2007
    • Funny Funny x 4
  4. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    10,928
    1,428
    678
    Sep 11, 2022
    “It is such a routine part of how Georgia judges and attorneys interact that I don’t think it should have been disclosed, necessarily, past the mandatory disclosures,” he said.

    I don't necessarily like it, but this quote from the article is accurate and expecting McAfee to disclose this is unreasonable. Attorneys routinely make larger contributions than this to judge's campaigns on a regular basis. That is just the system we operate in. Not that I'm 100% on board with it, but it is what it is.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  5. gaterzfan

    gaterzfan GC Hall of Fame

    1,927
    387
    1,713
    Feb 6, 2020
    Everything is relatable to a wrongdoing by DT.
     
  6. gaterzfan

    gaterzfan GC Hall of Fame

    1,927
    387
    1,713
    Feb 6, 2020
    Independence and objectivity in the legal business, judges included, are seemingly uncommon traits.

     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  7. GatorJMDZ

    GatorJMDZ gatorjack VIP Member

    25,600
    2,755
    1,868
    Apr 3, 2007
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. flgator2

    flgator2 GC Hall of Fame

    6,860
    710
    2,113
    Apr 3, 2007
    Gainesville
    Nathan Wade's phone at Fani Willis' home 35 times before they say affair began: docs (nypost.com)


    Nathan Wade’s phone has been tracked to District Attorney Fani Willis’ home late night in 2021, well before the pair claim they were a couple, according to a bombshell new court filing by attorneys for Donald Trump in his Georgia election fraud case.

    On 35 occasions Wade was in the vicinity of the condo Willis was subleasing from a friend in Hapeville, Georgia, “for an extended period of time” between April 1, 2021 and Nov. 30, 2021, according to Charles Mittelstadt, an investigator hired by Trump’s team.

    Many of those visits were before Wade was hired by Willis to be special prosecutor of the Trump case in November 2021, and appear to contradict court testimony last week when he said he claimed he been at the condo no more than 10 times before he was hired.

    The duo have told the court they didn’t strike up a romantic relationship until the spring of 2022, and broke up around a year later.


     
  9. sierragator

    sierragator GC Hall of Fame

    15,699
    13,320
    1,853
    Apr 8, 2007
    No one would even know who Fani Willis is if there were no case about the orange god.
     
  10. 108

    108 Premium Member

    18,148
    1,228
    1,313
    Apr 3, 2007
    NYC
    Trump is clearly innocent now!
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  11. gaterzfan

    gaterzfan GC Hall of Fame

    1,927
    387
    1,713
    Feb 6, 2020
    Wait, it’s DT’s fault that Fani either hired her romantic partner as a special prosecutor working for her or ….. started a relationship with a subordinate ……. and then chose to reimburse this subordinate for her share of their shared vacations in cash so there would be no audit trail to support the sharing of romantic getaway costs in the event of any investigation of said relationship?



     
  12. mikemcd810

    mikemcd810 Premium Member

    1,957
    436
    348
    Apr 3, 2007
    Curious if the people who claim to be concerned about this also feel the same way about Cannon presiding over a Trump case and any Trump cases that end up before the Supreme Court.
     
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 3
    • Wish I would have said that Wish I would have said that x 1
  13. ajoseph

    ajoseph Premium Member

    7,266
    2,675
    2,998
    Jan 15, 2008
    I think the practice of lawyers effectively funding judicial campaigns is stupid and rife with conflict. But, as you said, it is what it is. If judges weren’t elected, there would be need for this practice. But state judges are elected, and every single one of them has scores of lawyers and law firms contributing. There is, unfortunately, nothing out of the ordinary for a a judge to have lawyers before him that have contributed, some much more than others.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. ajoseph

    ajoseph Premium Member

    7,266
    2,675
    2,998
    Jan 15, 2008
    It is different. Canon was not elected; she was appointed l. She just so have been appointed by Trump. That alone is nit a disqualifying event, unless she is incapable of disregarding who appointed her.
     
  15. GatorJMDZ

    GatorJMDZ gatorjack VIP Member

    25,600
    2,755
    1,868
    Apr 3, 2007
    When my mother lived in Sun City Center (famous for heavy voter turnout,) I had several several campaign luncheons at her home for judicial candidates. No one ever suggested that created a conflict.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. ajoseph

    ajoseph Premium Member

    7,266
    2,675
    2,998
    Jan 15, 2008
    That’s what I’m saying. It’s nit a conflict, and the Courts have held it is no basis for disqualification. I’ve held judicial fundraisers from my office, and contributed to scores of them. It’s not a conflict, but it is, to some extent, a cost of doing business. And it IS an ugly part of the process.
     
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2024
    • Agree Agree x 2
  17. sierragator

    sierragator GC Hall of Fame

    15,699
    13,320
    1,853
    Apr 8, 2007
    Just talking points for the commentariat to get all lathered up over.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. mikemcd810

    mikemcd810 Premium Member

    1,957
    436
    348
    Apr 3, 2007
    I agree and I'm not saying it should be disqualifying. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of being concerned about a $150 donation compared to Trump appointed judges ruling on his cases. I can only assume the people who would claim to be concerned about this haven't raised the same concerns in the other scenario.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. ajoseph

    ajoseph Premium Member

    7,266
    2,675
    2,998
    Jan 15, 2008
    The entire “concern” over the contributions that is widespread and been going on forever, is a typical Trump contrivance. Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump’s local counsel contributed to the campaign.
     
    Last edited: Feb 23, 2024
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  20. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    10,928
    1,428
    678
    Sep 11, 2022
    I knew this was a possibility, but wasn't certain what legal red tape they'd have to go through to obtain. Sounds like this has been being worked on by President Trump's team for a while.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1