Bad day for Fani Willis
— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) January 31, 2024
Now she’s been caught on tape admitting to firing a whistleblower that exposed her illegal misuse of federal funds
The prosecutor is about to become the prosecuted… https://t.co/mjFINKMvuZ
Pending indictment against Trump in Georgia
212,988 Views |
2428 Replies |
Last: 2 days ago by TXAggie2011
In a new motion in GA case, Jeff Clark asks for letters from Biden White House to Willis' office (confirmed during hearing last month) and DOJ correspondence to Willis.
— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) February 1, 2024
Judge ordered WH letters filed under seal for review but Clark wants access. Clark also wants what is called… pic.twitter.com/9RDzDuFyP3
hearing on 2/15 on motion to recuse
There's an evidentiary hearing on the motion to disqualify Fani Willis and Nathan Wade on Feb 15.
— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) January 20, 2024
In light of the new credit card statements for trips and hotels..
If I'm the defense attorney, I'm putting them both under oath.
Wouldn't be shocked if they recuse before then. pic.twitter.com/Jm8PYmZYQ3
Right now, she will not recuse.
Quote:
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has no plans to step down from the Georgia election subversion case over allegations she's having an affair with her lead prosecutor, a decision driven in part over concern that her departure would effectively end the case against Donald Trump and his multiple defendants, sources familiar with the thinking inside the DA's office told CNN.
The sprawling racketeering case still has no trial date, and Willis and her team are keenly aware that the window to go to trial before the 2024 election is rapidly shrinking. Any change in the team handling the prosecution would likely delay the proceedings, and it's unclear if another prosecutor in Georgia would even be inclined to take up the case, given its political and legal challenges. …
Instead,
Willis is preparing to counter arguments from Trump and other co-defendants, not by necessarily disputing claims about the relationship but by arguing that defense attorneys seeking to remove her are wrong on the law, sources said.
Via Hot AirQuote:
A number of Georgia attorneys have made the same claim that the arrangement may look bad, but it's not illegal. That seems like a very thin reed on which to place one's hopes against an allegation of unethical behavior in a high-profile prosecution. And it looks worse when considering all of the circumstances, not just when cherry-picking individual elements. In the February 15 hearing, Willis will likely have to offer an explanation that covers all of these issues
- The decision to hire Wade for one of the most complex and novel RICO cases in memory despite the fact that he has never prosecuted a felony case in his career before now
- The timing of Wade's divorce, coming the day after Willis hired him
- The timing of their romance in relation to the hiring date and the divorce
- The amount of billing paid to Wade, as well as Willis' personal benefit from it
- Wade's contempt charge in his efforts to hide this income from discovery in his divorce
176 pages? That's a lot of denials.Quote:
In a 176-page court filing on Friday, Willis called the claims against her "meritless" and "salacious." She asked a judge to reject motions from Trump and other co-defendants that seek to disqualify her and her office from the case and to do so without a hearing. Willis denied claims of misconduct and said there was no evidence that the relationship between her and special prosecutor Nathan Wade had prejudiced the case.
Quote:
Willis's response came more than three weeks after Mike Roman, one of Trump's remaining 14 co-defendants in the criminal case and a former high-ranking campaign aide during the 2020 election, alleged in a court filing that Willis was engaged in a "personal, romantic relationship" with Wade, whose firm has been paid more than $653,000 by the district attorney's office since he was tapped as an outside prosecutor on the case in November 2021.
LINKQuote:
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee, who is overseeing the case, has scheduled a Feb. 15 evidentiary hearing on the allegations. Ashleigh Merchant, Roman's attorney, has said she plans to issue subpoenas for witnesses and documents to back up her client's claims of misconduct. Merchant said in a lawsuit this week that she has subpoenaed Willis and Wade to testify, and she is expected to seek testimony from Wade's current and former law partners and others associated with the district attorney's office.
Until now, neither Willis nor Wade had directly addressed or denied the allegations. Bank records made public as part of Wade's divorce proceedings showed Wade purchased plane tickets for himself and Willis on two occasions a trip to Aruba purchased in October 2022 on American Airlines, and a second trip purchased in April 2023 to San Francisco on Delta Air Lines.
It is unclear if Willis reimbursed Wade for the tickets or went on the trips. A spokesman for Willis has declined to comment. Wade has not responded to requests for comment, and his divorce attorney has declined to comment.
Merchant has told The Washington Post the claims against Willis and Wade were based on sources that she did not name as well as records she said had been disclosed as part of Wade's divorce proceedings but were under seal. While some documents from the divorce were subsequently made public, discovery materials were not, including Wade's bank statements and subpoenaed records from the district attorney's office.
🚨 JUST IN: After Fani Willis REFUSED to be served a subpoena from the House Judiciary Committee, the US Marshals Service intervened and HAND DELIVERED the subpoena to Willis
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) February 9, 2024
This will FORCE her to go testify before the judiciary committee related to her apparent misuse of… pic.twitter.com/5lQneVxCo6
How the tables have turned in this case.
Peter Navarro says hi for congressional subpeonas!
jt2hunt said:
Peter Navarro says hi for congressional subpeonas!
He's going to be saying "hi" from jail here shortly!
I'm Gipper
You get me believing there really might be a deep state and then you do something like this. I can't believe they are prosecuting her.
Because he defied a congressional subpoena.
Now do Eric Holder.jt2hunt said:
Because he defied a congressional subpoena.
And a million others!Ellis Wyatt said:Now do Eric Holder.jt2hunt said:
Because he defied a congressional subpoena.
BOMBSHELL REPORT: ⚠️ Despite Fani Willis claiming otherwise, "Special Prosecutor" Nathan Wade's former law partner will testify THE AFFAIR BEGAN BEFORE Willis was sworn in as DA..
— Chuck Callesto (@ChuckCallesto) February 10, 2024
This comes as Willis REFUSED TO BE SERVED her subpoena from the Judiciary Committee.
US Marshals… pic.twitter.com/GBIpFVlT8M
Oopsie
Destroy her!
I can't find the actual subpoena, but based on the cover letter, it looks like the subpoena is related to spending not related to this Trump case.
Letter here: https://www.ajc.com/politics/house-committee-subpoenas-willis-over-federal-grant-funds/6R2F5CWQPZASTEPJKWQZD3BC5U/
That is a good thing because she will not be able to claim any sort of "ongoing investigation" as a reason she can hold off producing documents.
My guess is that some Democrat in Congress will have his Doug stamper explain to Willis the minimum she has to do to avoid prosecution.
On Navarro:
Eric Holder, Mark Meadows, and Dan Scavino, were all held and content of Congress but avoided prosecution because the executive privilege claim was backed by Obama and Trump.
Navarro made up executive privilege. He literally had no evidence that Trump had ever claimed privilege.
Letter here: https://www.ajc.com/politics/house-committee-subpoenas-willis-over-federal-grant-funds/6R2F5CWQPZASTEPJKWQZD3BC5U/
That is a good thing because she will not be able to claim any sort of "ongoing investigation" as a reason she can hold off producing documents.
My guess is that some Democrat in Congress will have his Doug stamper explain to Willis the minimum she has to do to avoid prosecution.
On Navarro:
Eric Holder, Mark Meadows, and Dan Scavino, were all held and content of Congress but avoided prosecution because the executive privilege claim was backed by Obama and Trump.
Navarro made up executive privilege. He literally had no evidence that Trump had ever claimed privilege.
Outside of Navarro. How many people have been prosecuted and imprisoned for contempt of Congress?
If any, probably very few.
They usually always have some excuse. Executive privilege or fifth amendment are the most common.
Navarro did not have either of those.
It really can't be debated that Democrats generally get treated more favorably by the justice department. But Navarro's case is very different. He literally had no defense
They usually always have some excuse. Executive privilege or fifth amendment are the most common.
Navarro did not have either of those.
It really can't be debated that Democrats generally get treated more favorably by the justice department. But Navarro's case is very different. He literally had no defense
Exactly. Even though he had no case literally, no one's been prosecuted for doing the same thing which is contempt of Congress, for not following an issued subpoena.
I wish the house would be more assertive in their duties responsibilities as prescribed by the constitution. We need the peoples branch to be strong.
I wish the house would be more assertive in their duties responsibilities as prescribed by the constitution. We need the peoples branch to be strong.
Who was similar situated as navarro?
Im with you on the "democrats are treated differently" notion. But you can't use Navarro as an example. Who from democrats had a "privilege" claim that the president didn't even support?
Im with you on the "democrats are treated differently" notion. But you can't use Navarro as an example. Who from democrats had a "privilege" claim that the president didn't even support?
But turning back Willis, if she defies the subpoena, based on this Congress track record we can expect a contempt vote by 2026.
Yeah, I'm not sure who is similar I just know others have been held in contempt and not prosecuted by DOJ.
Yup this Congress needs to act at lightning speed, but they are slow as molasses!
Yup this Congress needs to act at lightning speed, but they are slow as molasses!
Difficult to do with a corrupt DOJjt2hunt said:
Exactly. Even though he had no case literally, no one's been prosecuted for doing the same thing which is contempt of Congress, for not following an issued subpoena.
I wish the house would be more assertive in their duties responsibilities as prescribed by the constitution. We need the peoples branch to be strong.
MagnumLoad said:Difficult to do with a corrupt DOJjt2hunt said:
Exactly. Even though he had no case literally, no one's been prosecuted for doing the same thing which is contempt of Congress, for not following an issued subpoena.
I wish the house would be more assertive in their duties responsibilities as prescribed by the constitution. We need the peoples branch to be strong.
Agree completely! We need that peoples house to start impeaching people that are worthy of impeachment start pushing back on executive orders, and start doing what they were constitutionally empowered to do by our founding fathers.
🚨BREAKING: The lawyer attempting to subpoena Trump prosecutors Fani Willis and Nathan Wade highlights that Wade submitted two different sworn statements in separate courts regarding his inappropriate relationship with Willis.
— KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) February 12, 2024
🔥🔥🔥
In May 2023, Wade filed in divorce court… pic.twitter.com/RDEv2qyAT2
BREAKING: Georgia Judge overseeing Trump case on Fani Willis’ lover scandal: “I think it's possible that the facts alleged by the defendant could result in disqualification.”pic.twitter.com/ZgtefVmWqg
— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) February 12, 2024
Quote:
A Fulton County judge said Monday it's "possible" District Attorney Fani Willis could be disqualified from her case prosecuting former President Donald Trump for election interference due to an alleged personal relationship with a prosecutor on her teamas the landmark case against the former president is snagged by allegations of a conflict of interest.
LINKQuote:
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee said Monday "I think it's possible that the facts alleged by the defendant could result in disqualification" when considering whether to quash a subpoena for Willis and others in her office, after Trump co-defendant Michael Roman pushed for Willis' removal from the case and claimed she had a personal relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade.
McAfee said Monday he would move forward with an evidentiary hearing scheduled for Thursday to hear the accusationssaying it "must occur to establish the record on those core allegations."
McAfee also said he thinks information on whether Willis and Wade had a relationship, whether it was romantic, when it formed and if it continues is relevant to the disqualification inquiry.
Based on the accounts of today I'm seeing on Twitter, today was not good day for Fani.
I'm Gipper
I'm Gipper
I think she quits. Just too much out there for her to continue to fight what is a losing one.Im Gipper said:
Based on the accounts of today I'm seeing on Twitter, today was not good day for Fani.
That would be the wise move, so I won't hold my breath!
I'm Gipper
I'm Gipper
Remember that book about Fani? Holee chit! She gave access to grand jury materials to the writers?
Im Gipper said:
Based on the accounts of today I'm seeing on Twitter, today was not good day for Fani.
I would call it a mixed bag.
Obviously, she wanted no hearing at all and there will be a hearing. If she knows the hearing will go horrible, then that's one thing.
However, the judge said basically everything in the motions to disqualify her aren't relevant and he won't hear evidence in them except the timeline around Wade and Willis' relationship and maybe some details about finances. So, he's not interested in things about Wade's experience or the claimed "forensic misconduct" or the alleged violations of the municipal code.
He also left the door open to quashing the subpoenas of Willis and Wade after hearing other testimony.
He treated it with a summary judgment viewpoint and there are indeed disputed issues of fact about their relationship.
In sum, he narrowed the issue to details about the romantic relationship.
And I expect (or am selfishly hoping) Thursday's hearing to be like one long episode of Real Housewives of Atlanta.
That would be the wise move unless you have very large Trump opposition parties continuing to prop up fani & party even if they have done wrong.Im Gipper said:
That would be the wise move, so I won't hold my breath!
Here's Judge McAfee's full summary remarks. While Willis and Wade will obviously be disappointed there will be a hearing, I don't think these remarks will have them quaking in their boots.
"…if there even was one."
"…if there even was one."
Here's what Judge Scott McAfee said about the Fani Willis allegations today. He thinks it's "possible" facts could result in disqualification, key question is whether Willis got "financial benefit" or "personal benefit" from relationship with Nathan Wade. Hearing Thursday pic.twitter.com/tFE46MaAn7
— Andrew Prokop (@awprokop) February 12, 2024
Wade has filed contradictory affidavits between his divorce filings in 2023 and then what he filed with McAfee's court regarding when the affair started. Then Wade went back to the interrogatories (sworn) from his divorce and took the 5th on that issue.
Judges don't like that kind of crap from lawyers in their court.
Judges don't like that kind of crap from lawyers in their court.
Featured Stories
See All
66:03
7h ago
6.0k
Players to Watch: No. 15 Texas A&M at Auburn
by Olin Buchanan
54:59
9h ago
1.1k
37:53
6h ago
773
Reed Report: Chatting with D-Kirk, recapping A&M's 4-0 home stand
by Luke Evangelist
10:56
13h ago
2.9k