|
Also prosecutors like are allowed to be biased against criminals. There is no pretense of neutrality. They're supposed to exercise their discretion but that's a high threshold.
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 00:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 18:45 |
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:The argument I think is the conflict of interest. Maybe he's qualified, maybe there's somebody more qualified? Maybe somebody would've done it cheaper? You're not the county District Attorney. You could absolutely do that if your secret boyfriend worked in your office, was a former judge, and is getting paid commensurately with other positions. The DA will have a wide discretion, and there is no conflict of interest between the two parties involved in an unrelated personal matter. Now is that how it will play out? Who the gently caress knows
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 00:43
|
|
|
Re: everyone going on and on about "Oh, Alex Jones is still living high on the hog!" Remember, in addition to everything else about our legal system being slow, Jones has a vested interest in presenting an aura of invincibility. The moment the stink of loser gets too thick his audience (and his ability to grift them) evaporates even more than it already has.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 00:44
|
|
|
Like this guy is not Ernest T. Bass or anything
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 00:45
|
|
|
Yeah my only concern is that the replacement(s) might not be suited for the job, but it smells like a conflict of interest on the case and it definitely raises questions about responsible use of taxpayer funds. The latter doesn't really bear on the case but could be a big problem for Willis and Wade personally or professionally.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 00:46
|
|
|
Google Jeb Bush posted:Yeah my only concern is that the replacement(s) might not be suited for the job, but it smells like a conflict of interest on the case and it definitely raises questions about responsible use of taxpayer funds. The latter doesn't really bear on the case but could be a big problem for Willis and Wade personally or professionally. i sorta have a suspcion that if this comes down to kemp doing something, he might make a deal of "ill let you wrap up this case and all that if you dont run/resign at some point when next election hits". but who knows. Kemps a ghoul but he hates trump and doesnt owe him anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 00:49
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:i sorta have a suspcion that if this comes down to kemp doing something, he might make a deal of "ill let you wrap up this case and all that if you dont run/resign at some point when next election hits". but who knows. Kemps a ghoul but he hates trump and doesnt owe him anything. Anyone would have a hard time right now trying to gain support for her removal, statewide. Kemp will stay out of this publicly. I still tend to doubt that this will affect the GA case at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 00:59
|
|
|
mdemone posted:You're not the county District Attorney. You could absolutely do that if your secret boyfriend worked in your office, was a former judge, and is getting paid commensurately with other positions. The DA will have a wide discretion, and there is no conflict of interest between the two parties involved in an unrelated personal matter. quote:An appearance of a conflict of interest exists when a reasonable person would conclude from the surrounding circumstances that the ability of the officer or employee to protect the public interest or impartially perform a public duty is compromised by financial or personal interests in the matter or transaction. The appearance of a conflict of interest can exist even in the absence of an actual conflict of interest, which exists whenever the officer or employee knows or should know that he or she has an interest that may be affected by his or her official acts or actions. I'm not a DA or even a lawyer, obviously so I guess we'll see soon enough how that goes  But I'm getting the impression that this is an actual problem from various actual lawyers commenting on the issue, for exampe:quote:So with that in mind, will Judge Scott McAfee disqualify Wade? I, I would say a hundred percent right? Like I, I can't envision a scenario in which Wade gets to stay on the case. Will he disqualify Willis? I would say I think that's probably more likely than not right now. And if, if the events are as they appear to be, right, and that would be a severe blow, right? E: there's no remedy specified for violating this so yeah they could leave her on theoretically I suppose mobby_6kl fucked around with this message at 01:03 on Jan 19, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 00:59
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Anyone would have a hard time right now trying to gain support for her removal, statewide. Kemp will stay out of this publicly. I still tend to doubt that this will affect the GA case at all. thats kinda my view. we will see what happens though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 01:01
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:How does hiring your lover, no matter the "wide discretion", not raise at least to the appearance of a conflict of interest? It's not an unrelated personal matter, you're giving a job to somone you're loving. Even if they're perfectly qualified, that will certainly raise questions as to whether there were other reasons for the choice. Oh it's surely a problem that needs to be adjudicated. I'm just saying that I think there aren't any valid grounds for dismissing Wade, in the RICO trial, and I think they'll rule that way. In any case Willis won't be disqualified because 1) none of this has anything to do with the case, and 2) the grand jury heard *her* and indicted appropriately. Nobody is getting their charges dismissed here. If I were Willis' office I would have already had him recuse, but they are going to play hardball I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 01:12
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Also prosecutors like are allowed to be biased against criminals. There is no pretense of neutrality. They're supposed to exercise their discretion but that's a high threshold. I think the argument is that since the special prosecutor receives a substantial amount of money for this case and that money is spent on trips with the DA (and their broader relationship), they pushed the case forward with the special prosecutor to get the money. I still think that shouldn’t matter for the case itself, either real evidence exists or not. However, it is very questionable behaviour, especially if there wouldn’t be enough evidence to convict.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 01:14
|
|
|
rkd_ posted:
It has no prejudicial impact on the grand jury indictments, because it could not have done so. It is presumed to have no prejudicial impact on the trial unless the defense can show otherwise, the attempt of which would be amusing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 01:28
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Anyone would have a hard time right now trying to gain support for her removal, statewide. Kemp will stay out of this publicly. I still tend to doubt that this will affect the GA case at all. Kemp would like to stay out of this publicly, but if/when Willis gets dismissed he has two things to consider: 1) He's term limited in '26 and what makes the most sense is to challenge Ossoff. To do that he'll need money and thus the good side of the money men, who will also have to take into consideration... B) Trump is either going to be President or still the head of the Republican Party in '26 and may have a challenger for Kemp in the primary, and it's hard to assume that the challenger will be as bad as Herschel Walker, who still had a fighting chance against Warnock. Kemp's best play will be to assign someone and give them the instructions to kick the can down the road and dismiss charges after the election, especially if/when Trump wins. If he wants to read the tea leaves and get back in Trump's good graces, he can order the charges be dismissed as an October surprise; combine that with Cannon dismissing the FL case at the same time and it gives Trump a victory lap which would probably put him over the top. In short, yet another jam wriggled out of by ol' Donnie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 01:43
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:...  https://www.rawstory.com/trump-supreme-court-ballot-brief/ I think this was an expected line of defense and while it seems ridiculous, with this supreme court...
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 02:12
|
|
|
Trump is gonna argue that he was never legitimately elected president, so the laws about presidents don't apply to him Masterful gambit, sir
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 02:21
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Oh it's surely a problem that needs to be adjudicated. I'm just saying that I think there aren't any valid grounds for dismissing Wade, in the RICO trial, and I think they'll rule that way. In any case Willis won't be disqualified because 1) none of this has anything to do with the case, and 2) the grand jury heard *her* and indicted appropriately. Nobody is getting their charges dismissed here. If he has to refuse the Willis' entire team is out per GA law, it taints the whole team.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 02:38
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:Kemp would like to stay out of this publicly, but if/when Willis gets dismissed he has two things to consider: Kemp is never and knows he is never going to be in Trump's so-called "good graces" (not that he really has anything approaching that in him).
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 02:40
|
|
|
cr0y posted:If he has to refuse the Willis' entire team is out per GA law, it taints the whole team. Well, gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 02:49
|
|
|
trump used to call newspapers to brag about how much sex he was having also trump can't be held accountable for crimes detected by sex havers!! edit: trump is to lauded as a brave a virile hero for having sex all the people against trump are evil sex havers!! InsertPotPun fucked around with this message at 03:24 on Jan 19, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 02:56
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:It... seems unlikely the speech was completely unrelated: Raskolnikov2089 posted:You can just read her sermon here: https://www.atlantanewsfirst.com/2024/01/15/read-fulton-county-da-fani-willis-improper-relationship-charges/, where she does in fact talk about the allegations.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 03:16
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:It... seems unlikely the speech was completely unrelated: I'm reading through the motion and it seems like Willis is arguing that the Wade's ex-wife is looking for irrelevant information and that is only intended for harassment. The motion is also claiming potential coordination between the MIchael Roman's counsel and Wade's ex-wife. Wade and his ex-wife had an uncontested, no-fault divorce that did not require conclusions about factually disputed issues and Wade's ex-wife admitted that the divorce was due to adultery on her part. She also already received all requested information about Wade's compensation by the DA's office. Also, as of the date, Michael Roman started trying to get Willis disqualified, there were no amendments to the pleadings that would lead to contested issues with the divorce justifying new discovery. The informational requests in the subpoena from Wade's ex-wife are also lack specificity. Willis is overall arguing that the subpoena is basically a big fishing expedition. It's not very sexy, but she's arguing that Roman's argument and Wade's ex-wife's subpoena are based on nothing, which makes it hard to respond to nothing. This approach seems driven by a desire to avoid giving inadvertent fuel to make Roman's conflict-of-interest theory look more substantial than it is. Eric Cantonese fucked around with this message at 06:18 on Jan 19, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 03:24
|
|
|
Randalor posted:Besides, there's no way she would keep quiet about this if she was, even if it was to blurt out "I wish the bombs blew you up" to a Dem in the House. https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1748120580484665574 She sure does know an awful lot about these pipe bombs!
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 04:09
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MattBinder/status/1748155843428618569?t=VvXtjcjNBUe_3wh6RO8kZw&s=19
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 04:12
|
|
|
smoobles posted:https://twitter.com/MattBinder/status/1748155843428618569?t=VvXtjcjNBUe_3wh6RO8kZw&s=19 O god. I need to send that to all my Dutch friends.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 04:16
|
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:Yeah, a living allowance of like $50K a month is insane. Bitch is broke like ten times over, he oughta be living on ramen in a cheap-rear end apartment, not spending half-a-mil yearly. Alex Jones is a different case to Trump, because the judgement against him is for far more than he has. The court is now trying to maximise how much money they can get for the victims, and part of that includes having Alex Jones work on his talk show and yell about gay frogs, because it pulls in millions of dollars a year. Since you can’t force someone to work, they need to have a pay incentive to get him to do his bullshit, otherwise he’d just quit. It’s not the sort of justice we’d like to see, but money will flow to his victims, and there is always the threat looming over Alex that if his show ever fails, then the court can take everything and it’s ramen time. Trump can keep paying these fines, so they’ll be resolved much faster than Alex Jones’s judgement.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 04:32
|
|
|
I posted that in the wrong thread but I'm keeping it up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 04:40
|
|
|
pumpinglemma posted:Last I heard Alex was still spending in the high six figures per year. But I’m sure he’s going on extra double-secret probation real soon now. Considering Infowars was documented raking in nine figures annually before the suit, that sounds like a pretty massive dropoff actually
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 05:03
|
|
|
Eric Cantonese posted:I'm reading through the motion and it seems like Willis is arguing that the Wade's ex-wife is looking for irrelevant information and that is only intended for harassment. The motion is also claiming potential coordination between the MIchael Roman's counsel and Wade's ex-wife. Wade and his ex-wife had an uncontested, no-fault divorce that did not require conclusions about factually disputes issues and Wade's ex-wife admitted that the divorce was due to adultery on her part. She also already received all requested information about Wade's compensation by the DA's office. Also, as of the date, Michael Roman started trying to get Willis disqualified, there were no amendments to the pleadings that would lead to contested issues with the divorce justifying new discovery. The informational requests in the subpoena from Wade's ex-wife are also lack specificity. Thanks for this post, I'm a dumb-dumb and couldn't work out her rationale if it wasn't "I'm guilty as hell and need to try and hide this". I always forget that fishing expeditions are a thing, basically 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 06:00
|
|
|
Desumaytah posted:Wingnut Welfare is a hell of a thing. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 06:25
|
|
|
smoobles posted:I posted that in the wrong thread but I'm keeping it up. Makes more sense than 80% of what Alina Habba has said in court.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 13:44
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:Re: everyone going on and on about "Oh, Alex Jones is still living high on the hog!" Jones is very publically self destructing. He's developed a habit of taking 5-10 minute long breaks while on air and comes back either way speedier or audibly slurring his words. When he last had notable white supremacist Nick Fuentes on he claimed he had to adjust cameras. Most recently he did it during his "debate" about Jan 6 and by the end he was barely able to string words togather. He may be holding off the worst of the damages by stalling in the courts but I have a feeling his personal life is a living nightmare for him and everyone around him. Cold comfort, I know, but it will not end well for him. edit: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2023/02/01/infowars-alex-jones-says-he-lives-hell-texts-show
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 15:52
|
|
|
Ubik_Lives posted:Alex Jones is a different case to Trump, because the judgement against him is for far more than he has. The court is now trying to maximise how much money they can get for the victims, and part of that includes having Alex Jones work on his talk show and yell about gay frogs, because it pulls in millions of dollars a year. Since you can’t force someone to work, they need to have a pay incentive to get him to do his bullshit, otherwise he’d just quit. i'd rather alex jones not do his show
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 16:37
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:Thanks for this post, I'm a dumb-dumb and couldn't work out her rationale if it wasn't "I'm guilty as hell and need to try and hide this". I always forget that fishing expeditions are a thing, basically So you might say you were fishing for answers? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 17:05
|
|
|
InsertPotPun posted:i'd rather alex jones not do his show Me too, but the lawsuit didn't ask for his show to be ended, and the court didn't rule that the show should be ended. The lawsuit asked for him to pay a lot of money, and the court ruled that he had to pay far more money than he actually has. The result of that is that the court actually wants him to keep making lots of money, so that he'll be able to pay out more of the money he owes to the victims' families. As long as he continues to obey the other condition on the judge's ruling (stop spreading Sandy Hook conspiracy theories), then the victims' families actually benefit from him continuing to run the show, because that's more money for them. If he quits or his show collapses, then the victims' families end up with less money in the end. Weird incentives come into play when you successfully sue someone for 10x their entire net worth.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 17:16
|
|
|
I can see how that would make sense in the context of a repayment regime where either his income is automatically garnished or one where if he’s a day late on a payment then bailiffs wander into his house and start grabbing anything that looks expensive, but he hasn’t paid a penny. The plaintiffs aren’t benefitting from his show continuing at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 17:28
|
|
|
he doesn't have to do his show to pay them. if he worked at home depot he'd have his wages garnished and he wouldn't have a show.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 17:41
|
|
|
Pretty sure if Alex Jones, or Trump, tried working at Home Depo they'd be pronounced dead at the scene within hours of attempting to actually do the job.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 17:49
|
|
|
win win win
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 17:51
|
|
|
pumpinglemma posted:I can see how that would make sense in the context of a repayment regime where either his income is automatically garnished or one where if he’s a day late on a payment then bailiffs wander into his house and start grabbing anything that looks expensive, but he hasn’t paid a penny. The plaintiffs aren’t benefitting from his show continuing at all. As for shutting down the show, if the plaintiffs didn't seek it, I don't see why the court would demand it as a remedy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 17:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 18:45 |
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Isn't this where it's all headed once the bankrupcy stuff is dealt with? Ubik_Lives posted:part of that includes having Alex Jones work on his talk show and yell about gay frogs, because it pulls in millions of dollars a year. Since you can’t force someone to work, they need to have a pay incentive to get him to do his bullshit, otherwise he’d just quit. i'm ok with making the paycheck for his show so small he wouldn't do it. he doesn't need half a million a year to do the only thing he can do. "here's fifty bucks a week to do your show" "i'll just quit and work at home depot!" "ok" "...i'll get back on air..."
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 18:18
|
|