Trump on Trial - Episode 2 |OT| The One with the Perfect Phone Call in Georgia (Fulton County)

[plagiarize]

Are you suggesting it should never have been investigated? Since it was "dreamt up"?

Can't people disagree without being accused of right wing bias?

Click to shrink...

That I think people are giving oxygen to right wing nonsense isn't accusing anyone of right wing bias. I don't think you are biased towards the right wing.

The only reason we got here is because Trump hired someone to dig up dirt on the person prosecuting him and found something salacious that they knew would get air play in the media.

Whatever the correct route for voicing legitimate concerns are, it was not this. Trump wasn't concerned that someone had an affair or that someone was maybe doing something shady with money. As far as I know, no one brought forwards *legitimate* concerns. The Judge found what the Trump team put together worth looking into for whatever reason. Perhaps even to expose it for the nonsense it is.

 

[phisheep]

This is what I don't understand. A personal, romantic relationship with your hired subordinate where non-business trips occurred and expenses are incurred is perfectly legitimate grounds for an investigation as to whether that DA should be removed from the case. So far, the testimony shows that nothing illegal occurred as Wade was reimbursed either directly or in-kind for all expenses but that doesn't mean it wasn't a legitimate line of inquiry no matter if it was done via distasteful tactics. Hell, the initial motion and response were persuasive enough to the judge that it necessitated this hearing. If it were pure fantasy then we wouldn't be having these hearings to begin with.

Click to shrink...

I think part of the trouble we are having here is that the relationship might have been, with other things, grounds for removing her as DA. But there are different routes for doing that, and making it a part of a motion to dismiss the entire case really isn't one of them.

So while there's room for disagreement over whether Willis should have been investigated for this, I don't think there's much room for disagreement that this case is not the appropriate vehicle.

Unless I'm missing something.

 

[Fnor]

I think part of the trouble we are having here is that the relationship might have been, with other things, grounds for removing her as DA. But there are different routes for doing that, and making it a part of a motion to dismiss the entire case really isn't one of them.

So while there's room for disagreement over whether Willis should have been investigated for this, I don't think there's much room for disagreement that this case is not the appropriate vehicle.

Unless I'm missing something.

Click to shrink...

If it was established that she personally profited from any aspect of the prosecution, her office would be required to be removed from the case. That makes this directly relevant to this proceeding in particular, since it's about disqualification. They were very careful not to let that happen, because they both presumably knew what a big issue that was. But, again, that came out in the hearing.

 

[plagiarize]

I think part of the trouble we are having here is that the relationship might have been, with other things, grounds for removing her as DA. But there are different routes for doing that, and making it a part of a motion to dismiss the entire case really isn't one of them.

So while there's room for disagreement over whether Willis should have been investigated for this, I don't think there's much room for disagreement that this case is not the appropriate vehicle.

Unless I'm missing something.

Click to shrink...

Bingo.

IF someone was legitimately concerned about the relationship and thought actual wrongdoing had happened, I imagine it would have been brought through the appropriate channels.

 

[Hollywood Duo]

Bingo.

IF someone was legitimately concerned about the relationship and thought actual wrongdoing had happened, I imagine it would have been brought through the appropriate channels.

Click to shrink...

Also if I've been listening correctly it sounds like at best this is about 10k spent on a couple mutual vacations. Really small stuff considering the rates lawyers get paid.

 

[millsaps05]

I think part of the trouble we are having here is that the relationship might have been, with other things, grounds for removing her as DA. But there are different routes for doing that, and making it a part of a motion to dismiss the entire case really isn't one of them.

So while there's room for disagreement over whether Willis should have been investigated for this, I don't think there's much room for disagreement that this case is not the appropriate vehicle.

Unless I'm missing something.

Click to shrink...

I see what you are saying but if this wasn't the right route then why are we even having the hearing? The judge would have just dismissed it if the motion was filed incorrectly? Right?

My entire point in this thread is that going in into this investigation and subsequent prosecution DA Willis knew that the Trump team would try to throw everything against the wall to see if anything would stick. With that knowledge, she made the judgement call to carry out an prolonged, undisclosed, romantic relationship with a hired subordinate. Furthermore, she knew how long the case would be potentially delayed if she did get dismissed because it had literally just happened in another of her cases where she was removed. She gave the grounds for this motion to be pursued through actions that 99% of DA's wouldn't have done.

 

[phisheep]

If it was established that she personally profited from any aspect of the prosecution, her office would be required to be removed from the case. That makes this directly relevant to this proceeding in particular, since it's about disqualification. They were very careful not to let that happen, because they both presumably knew what a big issue that was. But, again, that came out in the hearing.

Click to shrink...

Gotcha. I was getting confused between disqualification as DA and disqualification from the case.

 

[millsaps05]

Gotcha. I was getting confused between disqualification as DA and disqualification from the case.

Click to shrink...

Yes, but for the Trump team they will take either outcome because their goal is to get the cases delayed until after the election. Even though it is a state case so he can't dismiss it, he might have a good argument that the case should be put on hold until he completes his term, if elected president. Furthermore, not having to sit for this trial would benefit him politically.

While two different disqualification procedures, in the Trump metrics of delay, delay, they are functionally the same.

 

[phisheep]

Dangerous waters here. One of the lawyers trying to persuade the judge to just let all the evidence in and sort out its admissibility, relevance, privilege and so on afterwards.

Which would be fine and dandy in a bench hearing if the whole thing was not on fucking Youtube.

 

[TheOMan]

Holy shit at that story about why he teaches his daughter to keep cash. Something only a black person in this country would understand, powerful stuff.

Click to shrink...

I didn't hear this - why does he tell her to keep cash?

 

[phisheep]

I didn't hear this - why does he tell her to keep cash?

Click to shrink...

Because once he had two credit cards refused and they refused to take his check, all he had besides was a $10 bill.

 

[Scousefury]

I didn't hear this - why does he tell her to keep cash?

Click to shrink...

Because of racism, a black person with an American Express card? stolen. Visa card? stolen. Cash is safer.

 

[phisheep]

Judge just put a spoke in the theory. If they want to use the crime/fraud exemption to pierce privilege they gotta show fraud first.

So now they're try to.

 

[Scousefury]

This is all gossip and hear say. They have no evidence that they where in a relationship earlier than they say. Throw this shit out already.

 

[Hollywood Duo]

This is all gossip and hear say. They have no evidence that they where in a relationship earlier than they say. Throw this shit out already.

Click to shrink...

Judge is indulging them but there is just nothing.

 

[phisheep]

They really are pushing their luck with this argument.

 

[Royalan]

I think the thing that's confusing for me is that the allegation against Fani WIllis has two parts:

1) WIllis had a relationship with Wade

2) Wade and/or WIllis, through this relationship, enriched themselves or in any other way provided a benefit

I think it's important to look at 1 and 2 individually, because one is not an ethics violation without the other. Because while I can't speak for Fulton County (so please correct me if I'm wrong), but if it's anything like Philadelphia County…dating a colleague in itself is not an ethics violation. Hell, you can be a clerk level employee dating a supervisor level employee, and that in itself is not an ethics violation. (Seriously, gagged me when they went over this during our SH/Conduct training and there were multiple follow-up questions.)

Now, the increased scrutiny you're under if you do choose to "fraternize" with a coworker/subordinate is enough to make it not worth it for ME, it's nothing I would ever do. But "ick" is not an ethics violation; and if that weren't the case, we wouldn't be here. This would have been open-shut. But we're here because the charge is their relationship enabled an ethics violation; so I don't think that it's incidental or a stroke of luck that they haven't found proof of one. To me, it indicates that Fani Willis is a professional woman who knows what she's doing, so I'm not going to waste a single second tutting a grown woman who has demonstrated her competency to an absolutely absurd degree because the right is doing what the right always does and always will do.

 

[Loudninja]

View: https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1758568473645429104

 

[phisheep]

The subtitles on this youtube feed are dreadful. Are they AI generated?

 

[Sobriquet]

The subtitles on this youtube feed are dreadful. Are they AI generated?

Click to shrink...

Yeah, basically AI speech-to-text. It never works well.

 

[Zutroy]

"I haven't heard a point in a while"

Was thinking the same thing…

 

[Sobriquet]

Judge McAfee: "Mrs. Merchant, I haven't heard a point in a while"

lol6

 

[TheOMan]

Because once he had two credit cards refused and they refused to take his check, all he had besides was a $10 bill.

Click to shrink...

Because of racism, a black person with an American Express card? stolen. Visa card? stolen. Cash is safer.

Click to shrink...

Ah - of course, should have known. Sad.

 

[Deleted member 13206]

I've got this on in curiosity and I'm confounded to this Miss Merchant's rambling.

She's scrabbling.

 

[Primus]

I've got this on in curiosity and I'm confounded to this Miss Merchant's rambling.

She's scrabbling.

Click to shrink...

Typical Trump lawyer behavior, when their One Big Plan(tm) gets shot down by the judge, it's just hemming and hawing and scraping to try to make it work again.

 

[Deleted member 13206]

What a hilariously empty chain of questioning.

edit - the Judge is giving this guy way too much time, and so many outs. He's almost helping him out with his questioning, probably out of boredom/amusement.

 

[Sobriquet]

 

[phisheep]

And this is supposedly their star witness.

The lawyers are whispering strategy, but the AI text thing is picking it up.

 

[themanupstairs]

I'm not terribly impressed with the judge to be honest. He seems to be doing a lot of handholding for the ineptness of the defense lawyers to ask relevant or proper questions. Perhaps someone with legal expertise could weigh in.

Maybe it's just at the discretion of the judge.

To clarify by what I mean by ineptness is the defense lawyers basically asking the judge how to ask a question to get around an objection he sustained. It seems like the proper response would be that's a you problem either figure it out or move along.

 

[Deleted member 13206]

Is he going to call for a bad court thingy? This is farcical.

 

[phisheep]

I'm not terribly impressed with the judge to be honest. He seems to be doing a lot of handholding for the ineptness of the defense lawyers to ask relevant or proper questions. Perhaps someone with legal expertise could weigh in.

Maybe it's just at the discretion of the judge.

Click to shrink...

He's a very new judge. Was only sworn in last year. Helluva case to cut your teeth on.

 

[Cthulhu_Steev]

Man, I'm getting tired of Sadow puppy-eyeing the Judge whenever he thinks he's landed a hit. Smarmy git.

 

[CreepingFear]

I'm not terribly impressed with the judge to be honest. He seems to be doing a lot of handholding for the ineptness of the defense lawyers to ask relevant or proper questions. Perhaps someone with legal expertise could weigh in.

Maybe it's just at the discretion of the judge.

To clarify by what I mean by ineptness is the defense lawyers basically asking the judge how to ask a question to get around an objection he sustained. It seems like the proper response would be that's a you problem either figure it out or move along.

Click to shrink...

I'm no legal expert. I've heard a lot of legal experts on MSNBC say they were impressed with the judge's patience and fairness.

 

[Zutroy]

Sadow is a blowhard.

 

[Deleted member 13206]

Adultery is a crime?

 

[phisheep]

They're really going down the line of using adultery as the underlying crime for the crime/fraud exception? Christ.

 

[Zutroy]

They're really going down the line of using adultery as the underlying crime for the crime/fraud exception? Christ.

Click to shrink...

Glad the judge was having none of it.

 

[phisheep]

Adultery is a crime?

Click to shrink...

In Georgia, yes.

 

[Deleted member 13206]

They're really going down the line of using adultery as the underlying crime for the crime/fraud exception? Christ.

Click to shrink...

Felt like the judge did a double-take.

 

[Trouble]

Adultery is a crime?

Click to shrink...

In a surprising number of places, it technically is, yes.

 

[Deleted member 13206]

In Georgia, yes.

Click to shrink...

Bloody hell.

 

[FrostweaveBandage]

They're really going down the line of using adultery as the underlying crime for the crime/fraud exception? Christ.

Click to shrink...

This doesn't really make sense though. Neither Willis nor Wade are defendants in a court case. Why would crime-fraud exception apply?

 

[Cthulhu_Steev]

This doesn't really make sense though. Neither Willis nor Wade are defendants in a court case. Why would crime-fraud exception apply?

Click to shrink...

It doesn't, and they've been told a few times it doesn't, but they're digging though the bottom of the barrel to turn salacious gossip into a crime-fraud so they don't disappoint King Trump. Its a fucking farce.

 

[themanupstairs]

This is all pretty slimy; they haven't brought evidence they've subpoenaed witnesses to fish for it.

 

[phisheep]

This doesn't really make sense though. Neither Willis nor Wade are defendants in a court case. Why would crime-fraud exception apply?

Click to shrink...

Because their 'star witness' is also Wade's divorce lawyer and former law partner. They're trying to use the crime/fraud exception to pierce his assertion of attorney/client privilege to refuse to answer certain questions.

 

[themanupstairs]

I don't blame them for asserting attorney client privilege and refusing to answer any questions that could potentially open that door regardless of whether he actually knew anything about a prior romantic relationship or not. I don't know how you unring that bell.

The last thing anyone would want is a bunch of lawyers digging into privileged information to potentially be used in a smear campaign.

 

[Sobriquet]

Felt like the judge did a double-take.

Click to shrink...

He basically said you can't get charged with it anymore, so it's not a crime

 

[phisheep]

Well, if that is all the evidence they got, there's nothing there.

 

[Foltzie]

Do they all know each other? Fani's dad addressing the judge as 'John'.

Click to shrink...

I live in a city smaller than Georgia, but the county is roughly the same size to Fulton. The attorneys practicing in particular courts all know each other as the universe relatively small once you go down to specific areas of law.

 

[themanupstairs]

Wild seems like the defense councils star witness Bradley may have sexually assaulted someone hence his leaving of the firm and end of professional relationship with mr wade.