Trump can appeal ruling that kept Georgia prosecutor on case, judge says
reuters.com
A Georgia judge on Wednesday said Republican U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump and eight of his co-defendants in the state's criminal election subversion case could appeal a ruling that let lead prosecutor Fani Willis remain on the case.
Fulton County Judge Scott McAfee's decision cleared the way for the former U.S. president and the others to ask a Georgia state appeals court to consider whether Willis, the Fulton County district attorney, should be disqualified over her romantic relationship with a former deputy, Nathan Wade.
McAfee indicated he would continue addressing other legal issues while the appeals court considers whether to take up the disqualification bid. A trial date has not yet been set.
These stall tactics are a damn joke.
worse: the judge provided it here
Not to half of the population, unfortunately.
If it was you or I, we would have been immediately thrown into prison.
Wasn't the guy already let go? Sounds like wrongful termination if they can still do this
Yes, his contract was already terminated (he was a contractor, not an employee). However, this is saying that they can appeal the decision to allow Fani to stay even after he was removed from the team. The defense thinks BOTH should be removed and that the whole process should be restarted, since the person running the process had a financial incentive to prolong the trial (their rationale, not mine). This judge is allowing them to appeal the decision to allow one of them to continue. It isn't a case of wrongful termination.
This is the kind of factually-correct legal commentary I’ve come to expect on Lemmy.
Fani Willis set this up. Complain all you want, but it was her decision making that allowed this to be possible.
Not sure why you are being downvoted. Anyone who works in a big company knows there are strict rules about dating in the workplace. She is in charge of maybe the highest profile and most important criminal trial in US history. Even if what they did was totally ethical, it is incredibly obvious to anyone that you have to be careful about the appearance of impropriety when in charge of something so damn important. She's a lawyer! She has to know that everything she does will be under a microscope. And dating the person you hired using money from the trial of a former president is CLEARLY going to be attacked.
I'll say it again: even if what they did was perfectly ethical, the appearance of impropriety is clear; and she should have been acutely aware of endangering this critically important case. I personally don't think what they did was morally or ethically wrong, but it was not professional.
Any place I've ever worked, it was definitely grounds for immediate termination. You most certainly should not be fucking your subordinates. Even if you're 100% certain the relationship is consensual, the subordinate could feel as if it's not, but is too fearful of losing their livelihood to object otherwise.
Because they pull their thoughts and talking points from white liberal media outlets where criticism of your own party or side is a greater sin than all others. Its the 'Blue no matter who' crowd, the MSNBC/ CNBC/ NPR listeners. Its the same idiots who, when you criticize Hillary's completely idiotic approach to the upper Midwest in 2016 say "But she won the popular vote". They are a class of people who have been raised to be unable to distinguish between symbolic victories and actually winning. They are a lost and rudderless people who have been losing political power for 20 years and don't seem to understand why. Its because the owners of the media sources they consume are on the same political side that the class perceives themselves 'against'.
They are everywhere and they are idiots who think they know something because NPR played some snappy classical music between segments. They are a barrier to progress in this country and fundamental to the goosestep march towards fascism we seem locked into. They're the systems apologists who block any attempts at reform that can get us off this train to oblivion.
If you are downvoting valid critical assessments of your own party because you don't like them, then you are part of the problem. Develop a spine and develop some rhetoric. Stop accepting symbolic bullshit, and stop accepting excuses.
Your name is appropriate.
She could have prevented all of this. It is entirely an unforced error on her part, and you are defending her subverting and derailing this trial. Get your head straight. This all could have been prevented.
Nah. I just commented on how appropriate your nic is.
Absolutely, no matter how careful they were about the relationship, Willis had to know this could create the appearance of impropriety. Which is exactly what the judge ruled and likely any sane judge would have ruled. Willis may as well have asked, "how can I snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?" Because she absolutely found the answer.
Lemmy seems to think otherwise.
While I do enjoy the place, it can be an echo chamber. And you seem to have upset the Indigo Blob.