The Frankish Reich Posted January 9 Posted January 9 I'm listening to the oral argument in the federal appeals court in DC "presidential immunity" claim. Trump is going to lose. At least 2 judges have Trump's attorney - a good attorney - twisted into a knot. 1
Tommy Callahan Posted January 9 Posted January 9 Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis hired her secret lover to serve as special prosecutor in the Georgia racketeering case against Donald Trump and 18 other defendants, according to a Monday filing on behalf of Mike Roman, a defendant who led election day operations for the 2020 Trump campaign: “[T]he district attorney and the special prosecutor have been engaged in an improper, clandestine personal relationship during the pendency of this case, which has resulted in the special prosecutor, and, in turn, the district attorney, profiting significantly from this prosecution at the expense of the taxpayers." The prosecutor is Nathan Wade, a private attorney in the midst of a divorce who "has little to no experience trying felony cases, much less complex RICO actions," according to the 127-page filing which seeks to have the charges against Roman dropped and both Willis and Wade disqualified from further participation in the case. According to the complaint, Wade has raked in at least $653,000 and upwards of $1 million for handling the high-profile case. By virtue of their relationship, that pile of taxpayer money benefits Willis, as they've traveled together to Florida, the Caribbean and Napa Valley, California, adding that Wade has also bought tickets for the pair to travel on Norwegian and Royal Caribbean cruise ships. In addition to his $250 hourly rate, Wade has also billed Fulton County for thousands of dollars in air travel and hotel stays, according to invoices attached to the filing. He categorized them as interview and research trips. The filing also alleges that Willis contracted with Wade contract without proper approval, as such a move requires a vote by the Fulton County Board of Commissioners. Roman's lawyer, Ashleigh Merchant tells the Wall Street Journal her search of board meeting minutes found no indication his appointment was ever discussed, much less voted upon The timing of the transaction was rich: Wade filed for divorce the very day after his first contract with Willis began. The divorce is still pending, and Wade managed to have the proceedings sealed -- for now. Merchant is asking for them to be unsealed. Monday's filing sums up the shadiness of the dealings nicely: On the day before Wade filed for divorce, [Willis] entered into an agreement to pay Wade far above what any other prosecutor in her office was being paid, and she hid this agreement from Fulton County, despite Wade being the single biggest expenditure in her office for professional service contractors for both 2022 and 2023. ... Wade is being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to prosecute this case on her behalf. In turn, Wade is taking Willis on, and paying for vacations across the world with money he is being paid by the Fulton County taxpayers and authorized solely by Willis. “It’s a bad look and it’s potentially criminal—again, assuming everything is true,” former Georgia prosecutor Chris Timmons tells the Journal. However, while Willis's procurement of Wade's services may have been illegal, Timmons doubts it would affect the indictment. Willis has yet to comment on the accusations, and a spokesman says a response will come "via a filing with the court." The filing contains plenty of documentation about Wade's hiring and billings, but no evidence of the romantic relationship, beyond citing "sources close" to the couple. Four defendants have pleaded guilty in the Fulton County case that alleges a conspiracy to interfere with the 2020 presidential election. Roman faces seven charges, including conspiracy to commit forgery, conspiracy to file false documents and racketeering. And just when you thought it all couldn't get any shadier, there's also this gem in the heap of exhibits attached to the filing... Phil Holloway ✈️ on X: "It literally says “conf with White House Counsel” in May of 2022 This is Fulton DA Fani Willis lead prosecutor in the Trump case billing taxpayers $2000 to talk to Joe Biden’s White House about prosecuting Biden’s political opponent https://t.co/oCGjx7j3bA" / X (twitter.com) A bill for work at the white house is this one of them walls? 1
Kemp Posted January 9 Author Posted January 9 And Haley the Spineless will continue to refuse to go after Trump.
The Frankish Reich Posted January 9 Posted January 9 41 minutes ago, BillStime said: True. No attorney listening to that oral argument would walk away thinking that Trump's sweeping immunity claim has a snowball's chance in hell of prevailing. Even the Republican appointee judge referred to a key point in Trump's argument as "paradoxical." The only question is how sweeping the opinion shooting down the absolute immunity argument will be. 2
sherpa Posted January 9 Posted January 9 50 minutes ago, Kemp said: And Haley the Spineless will continue to refuse to go after Trump. I believe she has. 2
The Frankish Reich Posted January 9 Posted January 9 56 minutes ago, Kemp said: And Haley the Spineless will continue to refuse to go after Trump. I am kicking myself for not seeing this one coming .... 1
Tiberius Posted January 9 Posted January 9 Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley has trimmed former President Donald Trump’s lead in the Republican primary race in New Hampshire to single digits, according to a new CNN Poll conducted by the University of New Hampshire. Trump still holds a meaningful lead in the poll, with the backing of 39% of likely Republican primary voters in New Hampshire compared to Haley’s 32%. The rest of the field lags far behind in the poll, with former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie at 12%, entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy at 8%, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis at 5% and former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson at less than 1%. https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/09/politics/cnn-new-hampshire-poll/index.html 1
Tommy Callahan Posted January 9 Posted January 9 https://dailycaller.com/2024/01/09/top-prosecutor-trump-election-case-met-white-house-counsel-indictment/ Not political you say. "Top Prosecutor In Trump Election Case Met With White House Counsel Before Indictment" The timing of the transaction was rich: Wade filed for divorce the very day after his first contract with Willis began. The divorce is still pending, and Wade managed to have the proceedings sealed -- for now. Merchant is asking for them to be unsealed. Monday's filing sums up the shadiness of the dealings nicely: On the day before Wade filed for divorce, [Willis] entered into an agreement to pay Wade far above what any other prosecutor in her office was being paid, and she hid this agreement from Fulton County, despite Wade being the single biggest expenditure in her office for professional service contractors for both 2022 and 2023. ... Wade is being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to prosecute this case on her behalf. In turn, Wade is taking Willis on, and paying for vacations across the world with money he is being paid by the Fulton County taxpayers and authorized solely by Willis. After his appointment as a special prosecutor, Wade met with officials of the White House Counsel’s Office on May 23 and Nov. 18, 2022, during Willis’ investigation of Trump and several months prior to his indictment, according to billing records included in a motion to disqualify Wade from the case. In both cases, Wade billed the district attorney’s office $2,000 for eight hours of work regarding his meetings with the White House Counsel’s Office. The names of the officials he met with are unknown, and it is unclear whether he met with Dana Remus or Stuart Delery, Biden’s two White House counsels during that period.
Kemp Posted January 9 Author Posted January 9 1 hour ago, sherpa said: I believe she has. What exactly did she say that you consider going after Trump? I know she said if he is found guilty of insurrection she will pardon him. 1
Tiberius Posted January 9 Posted January 9 Only a friggin degenerate POS would eveb attempt to make such an argument. I guess a President can just arrest the rival senators so he can't be impeached. Kill all the judges legally and never face any consequences. Insane! https://www.semafor.com/article/01/09/2024/trump-immunity-hearing-president-assassinate-rival-not-prosecuted Former president Donald Trump’s lawyer argued that presidential immunity would cover the U.S. president ordering political rivals to be assassinated by SEAL Team Six. During a hearing at a federal appeals court on Tuesday, Trump’s lead lawyer John Sauer made a sweeping argument for executive immunity, essentially saying that only a president who has been impeached and removed from office by Congress could be criminally prosecuted. Therefore, Sauer argued, the former president should be shielded from criminal prosecution. One of the judges asked Sauer: “Could a president who ordered SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rival, and is not impeached, would he be subject to criminal prosecution?” Sauer responded: “If he were impeached and convicted first... there is a political process that would have to occur.”
The Frankish Reich Posted January 9 Posted January 9 Trump's legal team advanced a "no exceptions to immunity" argument that really wasn't necessary for him to win this one, and the judges called them on it. The argument: even with a former President, a criminal proceeding based on ANY acts that he undertook while President is immune from prosecution UNLESS he has been impeached/convicted by Congress. So the example here was an extreme one - "what about something so clearly outside the scope of his Presidential duties, like ordering his opponent killed?" Trump's attorneys wouldn't even concede that. A more narrow argument might have made things easier, like "immunity unless impeached and convicted by Congress, provided that the alleged crime was at least somewhat related to his duties as President." So why take the hard road instead of the easy one? My guess: Trump himself wants the Supreme Court to grant him general immunity for everything he did while President, thereby taking care of all of the criminal actions, not just this one. He's not making life any easier for his lawyers... 2
Tiberius Posted January 9 Posted January 9 8 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Trump's legal team advanced a "no exceptions to immunity" argument that really wasn't necessary for him to win this one, and the judges called them on it. The argument: even with a former President, a criminal proceeding based on ANY acts that he undertook while President is immune from prosecution UNLESS he has been impeached/convicted by Congress. So the example here was an extreme one - "what about something so clearly outside the scope of his Presidential duties, like ordering his opponent killed?" Trump's attorneys wouldn't even concede that. A more narrow argument might have made things easier, like "immunity unless impeached and convicted by Congress, provided that the alleged crime was at least somewhat related to his duties as President." So why take the hard road instead of the easy one? My guess: Trump himself wants the Supreme Court to grant him general immunity for everything he did while President, thereby taking care of all of the criminal actions, not just this one. He's not making life any easier for his lawyers... Biden should have Seal Team Six make a surpRise appearance at a Trump rally. An airplane can fly overhead with a banner: Thank's Donald, Good Bye Donald!
sherpa Posted January 9 Posted January 9 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Biden should have Seal Team Six make a surpRise appearance at a Trump rally. An airplane can fly overhead with a banner: Thank's Donald, Good Bye Donald! They wouldn't show up. 1 hour ago, Kemp said: What exactly did she say that you consider going after Trump? She has said, repeatedly, that the man was OK when he was elected, but that time has passed and everything about him is surrounded by chaos, and we don't need nor want that. She says it all the time. She is correct, and that's why I like her. She certainly is not "spineless," per your claim. Edited January 9 by sherpa 1
Tiberius Posted January 9 Posted January 9 14 minutes ago, sherpa said: They wouldn't show up. Not that you would know 1
sherpa Posted January 9 Posted January 9 22 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Not that you would know Ya I do know. The evidence is overwhelming that you have absolutely no idea about the UCMJ or what that entails. Similar to the red tail guy's claims months ago about the US using it's military to strike domestic targets. The same as you have absolutely no idea about weapons selection regarding mission goals, and how that issue determines what is used. No surprise there, but your posts are funny.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 9 Posted January 9 (edited) Just now, sherpa said: They wouldn't show up. She has said, repeatedly, that the man was OK when he was elected, but that time has passed and everything about him is surrounded by chaos, and we don't need nor want that. She says it all the time. She is correct, and that's why I like her. She certainly is not "spineless," per your claim. and risk a mutiny charge? it would set an example for the upcoming shooting civil war... Edited January 9 by Joe Ferguson forever
Recommended Posts