Law Details of Fani Willis’ alleged ‘improper’ relationship with prosecutor may go public as judge unseals his divorce case

[cottagecheesefan]

Nope, he threw out 6 of 45 charges and he gave the prosecution 6 months to fix the problem with those charges. The problem is that the charges did not include enough detail for the defense to prepare for adequately. If the prosecution relists those charges with greater detail, they're back in.

No, not if they relist (the term is actuall refile, wow some lawyer). He said they have to appeal, or form a whole new grand jury. And it wasn't just that there wasn't enough detai, they didn't cite one actual violation of the constitution or oath of office.

And Trump was charged with only 13 charges in GA, 6 of which were dismissed (half, as I said, and they happen to be the most damning).

Maybe actually look into the case before you pretend to be a lawyer lol

 

[panamaican]

No, not if they relist. He said they have to appeal, or form a whole new grand jury. And it wasn't just that there wasn't enough detai, they didn't cite one actual violation of the constitution or oath of office.

And Trump was charged with only 13 charges in GA, 6 of which were dismissed (half, as I said, and they happen to be the most damning).

Maybe actually look into the case before you pretend to be a lawyer lol

Which is what I said. If they fix the problems with the charges within 6 months they can relist them. Fixing the problem would require reindictment...after which they can relist the charges. So, no, the judge did not throw out half the charges. To throw them out would mean that they're permanently out. Can't be brought back.

McAfee wrote that prosecutors could seek a reindictment to supplement the six dismissed counts. Even if the statute of limitations has expired, the judge gave the state six months to resubmit the case to a grand jury. Prosecutors could also ask for permission to appeal the ruling. The case has yet to be scheduled for trial.

And what you wrote was:

didnt the judge just throw out half the case

Which is not the same as half the charges against Trump. There are other people in the case. Also, he only threw out 3 charges against Trump, not 6. So even there, 3 out of 13 isn't half, lol.

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee quashed six counts in the indictment, including three against Trump, the presumptive 2024 Republican presidential nominee.

 

[cottagecheesefan]

Which is what I said. If they fix the problems with the charges within 6 months they can relist them. Fixing the problem would require reindictment...after which they can relist the charges. So, no, the judge did not throw out half the charges. To throw them out would mean that they're permanently out. Can't be brought back.



And what you wrote was:


Which is not the same as half the charges against Trump. There are other people in the case. Also, he only threw out 3 charges against Trump, not 6. So even there, 3 out of 13 isn't half, lol.

So he quashed 1/4 of the 45 million counts, still the most important. Glad your willing to show you did not follow the case and not a lawyer.

 

[idrankyourbeer]

didnt the judge just throw out half the case due to problems with the grand jury and indictment? And they now have to either appeal or form another grand jury? I know you're a lawyer, so I am sure you're aware there is no defense in a grand jury, and they still screwed even that up.

Maybe you aren't a lawyer?

[url embed not working]

McAfee wrote that prosecutors could appeal the ruling or ask a grand jury to produce a more specific indictment on those six counts.

he dismissed 3 minor charges and told them to come back and refile it properly. in terms of sentencing guidelines, those 3 charges don't amount to shit compared to the rico one. that carries a mandatory 5 year minimum sentence. that's the one charge you want to get rid of. there's another two that carry a mandatory minimum one year as well. if the state wants to and decides they still have a case, they'll just refile it in a superseding indictment and that will be the end of it.

but i guess when you're desperate for any kind of win you have to take what you can get.

It is quite funny in this thread that the lefties will say the right will believe anything Trump, when they case is literally falling apart lol

it looks to me like your english is quite literally falling apart lol

 

[idrankyourbeer]

Which is not the same as half the charges against Trump. There are other people in the case. Also, he only threw out 3 charges against Trump, not 6. So even there, 3 out of 13 isn't half, lol.

these people can't read or think. they only do memes and flash cards. you're overestimating them bigly if you assume they can math.

 

[cottagecheesefan]

he dismissed 3 minor charges and told them to come back and refile it properly. in terms of sentencing guidelines, those 3 charges don't amount to shit compared to the rico one. that carries a mandatory 5 year minimum sentence. that's the one charge you want to get rid of. there's another two that carry a mandatory minimum one year as well. if the state wants to and decides they still have a case, they'll just refile it in a superseding indictment and that will be the end of it.

but i guess when you're desperate for any kind of win you have to take what you can get.



it looks to me like your english is quite literally falling apart lol

3 minor charges? Like all the ones related to the constitution and the phone call? <45> <45>

Please explain to me this racketeering charge. Feel free to copy and paste their legal filing if you are not able to produce your own argument

 

[idrankyourbeer]

3 minor charges? Like all the ones related to the constitution and the phone call? <45> <45>

Please explain to me this racketeering charge. Feel free to copy and paste their legal filing if you are not able to produce your own argument

hey finally a reply.....now we're getting somewhere.

how about this, since i asked you a simple question first, and i've asked it multiple times just to make sure that it got through to you, i'll explain your question all to you in language that even a trump supporter can understand after you answer my simple question and tell me which page of todays legal filing that.....

In his ruling, the judge actually says she should be investigated by the state.

you tucked your dick and clucked the first two times little boy. maybe the 3'rd time's the charm?

here's the filing. there's not very many pages and reading comes naturally to you people. so on what page did the judge actually say that?

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND DISQUALIFY THE FULTON COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY

Friday March 15, 2024

www.documentcloud.org

page number please! it shouldnt be that hard to produce 1 or 2 numbers now should it? cluckedy cluck right? surely we're not being a bunch of disingenuous political hacks and making shit up in our heads now just to try to help ourselves cope with todays ruling or anything.

 

[cottagecheesefan]

hey finally a reply.....now we're getting somewhere.

how about this. i'll explain it all to you after you tell me which page of todays legal filing that.....


you tucked your dick and clucked the first two times little boy. maybe the 3'rd time's the charm?

here's the filing. there's not very many pages and reading comes naturally to you people. so on what page did the judge actually say that?

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND DISQUALIFY THE FULTON COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY

Friday March 15, 2024

www.documentcloud.org

page number please! cluckedy cluck! surely we're not making shit up in our heads now just to try to help ourselves cope with todays ruling right?

Did you read it? Citing a log list of entities that can look into unanswered questions is a long winded synonym of "investigate". Are you retarded?

Page 9

Other forums or sources of authority such as the General Assembly, the Georgia State Ethics Commission, the State Bar of Georgia, the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, or the voters of Fulton County may offer feedback on any unanswered questions that linger. forums or sources of authority such as the General Assembly, the Georgia State Ethics Commission,the State Bar of Georgia, the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, or the voters of Fulton County may offer feedback on any unanswered questions that linger. But those are not the issues determinative to the Defendants’ motions alleging an actual conflict.

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

Nope, he threw out 6 of 45 charges and he gave the prosecution 6 months to fix the problem with those charges. The problem is that the charges did not include enough detail for the defense to prepare for adequately. If the prosecution relists those charges with greater detail, they're back in.

The detail in the charges presented in the filing and the detail presented in the grand jury hearing aren't going to be the same. The grand jury is going to see all of the evidence, the filing only lists enough to justify the charge. No one is ever convicted based on the filing of charges, they're convicted on the evidence itself.

And of course we know that there's no defense in a grand jury. Hence a reasonable belief that they can win this case. If they can't convince a grand jury then there's no reasonable chance of winning. I am a lawyer so I'll walk you through the basics here.

The prosecution has to prove that a crime was committed. A crime has specific elements. The prosecution's job is to prove that each of those elements happened. It doesn't matter if there's a defense or not. If the elements can be proved, the crime happened. The defense tries to prove that the elements did not happen. From the prosecution's side, if they can prove the elements to a grand jury then they know that they have all of the facts necessary to convict the perpetrator. That's a more than reasonable belief that they can win the trial -- they already know they have the facts. The rest of it is about how the defense will try to take apart the prosecutor's case and how the prosecutor handles it. But the facts required for conviction -- they're already known to both parties and are convincing enough for a jury.

Um....you got a lot of facts wrong here.

 

[cottagecheesefan]

Um....you got a lot of facts wrong here.

As soon as you try to call them out, they will then just attack you.

I don't pretend to be a lawyer who can remove threads and posts. But how off are they? LOL

 

[idrankyourbeer]

Did you read it? Citing a log list of entities that can look into unanswered questions is a long winded synonym of "investigate". Are you retarded?

Page 9

Other forums or sources of authority such as the General Assembly, the Georgia State Ethics Commission, the State Bar of Georgia, the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, or the voters of Fulton County may offer feedback on any unanswered questions that linger. forums or sources of authority such as the General Assembly, the Georgia State Ethics Commission,the State Bar of Georgia, the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, or the voters of Fulton County may offer feedback on any unanswered questions that linger. But those are not the issues determinative to the Defendants’ motions alleging an actual conflict.

oh, page 9. i missed that tiny insignificant portion over all the rest of the shit that was said. now i know what youre talking about.

now i know why you only posted the last 2 or 3 sentences because the rest of it is just more of the defense's argument getting dissected and completely picked apart, with a little bit of chastising fani willis for her unprofessionalism mixed in.

basically he's just saying that fani willis playing the race card or not being able to recall certain things off memory or getting angry at one of the attorneys questioning her was unprofessional during the hearing, but if they have any questions regarding that they can raise them elsewhere as she done nothing unlawful and it's not the courts problem to deal with.

the judge just ruled that there was no actions that were unlawful from her testimony during the hearing. thats the part ahead of what you posted that you conveniently left out. basically saying that she did nothing illegal in her testimony but if you don't like her conduct then go and cry to the state bar and the ethics board until they hand down a $500 sanction and a $200 ethics violation just to appease you or whatever.

but hey if "i cannot recall" is grounds for monetary sanctions let alone removal from a judicial or political office, or getting held back from performing their duties, then MTG should be getting burned at the stake from all those hundreds of times times "she could not recall" during her J6 deposition the other year. and maybe they should even hit up terrence bradley too, that guy had a severe and sudden case of memory amnesia and didn't remember shit and didn't know anything after they brought his ass back up on the stand to unleash that "smoking gun"

 

[emefer]

No, not if they relist (the term is actuall refile, wow some lawyer). He said they have to appeal, or form a whole new grand jury. And it wasn't just that there wasn't enough detai, they didn't cite one actual violation of the constitution or oath of office.

And Trump was charged with only 13 charges in GA, 6 of which were dismissed (half, as I said, and they happen to be the most damning).

Maybe actually look into the case before you pretend to be a lawyer lol

3 against trump were dismissed. Not 6. And not half.
Why don’t you get the story straight before the diarrhea starts flowing.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

they don't have to admit that, do they? they can always claim they have a reasonable chance at a conviction.

the right's argument is they're doing this to hurt him and they have all the incentive to do so, even if they assume it will be a hung jury...."the process is the abuse".

The abuse is TR7MP and his allies scheming to overturn the election results after losing more than 60 court cases and several audits failed to find any fraud.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

Yeah, they'll just have to find a jury who've never heard of Trump or have no opinion on him and will just have to focus on the incredible merits of Atlanta mafia law for presidential elections.

Or just find people that aren't MAGA lickspittles that wave TR7MP flags and literally say they'd accept him as a dictator.

 

[cottagecheesefan]

oh, page 9. i missed that tiny insignificant portion over all the rest of the shit that was said. now i know what youre talking about.

now i know why you only posted the last 2 or 3 sentences because the rest of it is just more of the defense's argument getting dissected and completely picked apart, with a little bit of chastising fani willis for her unprofessionalism mixed in.

basically he's just saying that fani willis playing the race card or not being able to recall certain things off memory or getting angry at one of the attorneys questioning her was unprofessional during the hearing, but if they have any questions regarding that they can raise them elsewhere as she done nothing unlawful and it's not the courts problem to deal with.

the judge just ruled that there was no actions that were unlawful from her testimony during the hearing. thats the part ahead of what you posted that you conveniently left out. basically saying that she did nothing illegal in her testimony but if you don't like her conduct then go and cry to the state bar and the ethics board until they hand down a $500 sanction and a $200 ethics violation just to appease you or whatever.

but hey if "i cannot recall" is grounds for monetary sanctions let alone removal from a judicial or political office, or getting held back from performing their duties, then MTG should be getting burned at the stake from all those hundreds of times times "she could not recall" during her J6 deposition the other year. and maybe they should even hit up terrence bradley too, that guy had a severe and sudden case of memory amnesia and didn't remember shit and didn't know anything after they brought his ass back up on the stand to unleash that "smoking gun"

Uh, no. He is basically saying any of those bodies can investigate. Nice wall of text psycho. VERY long winded way of saying you're wrong <45> <45>

 

[idrankyourbeer]

Uh, no. He is basically saying any of those bodies can investigate. Nice wall of text psycho. VERY long winded way of saying you're wrong <45> <45>

that's nice. go cry to the state bar and maybe you can get her sanctioned for some pocket change. judge ruled that she didn't do anything unlawful, engage in any kind of practice that would be grounds for removal, and she will remain on the case. you can post your dumb little fanfiction and smileys as you throw around your juvenile little insults all you want while you continue cope and seethe.

but hey perhaps a $500 fine for being angry and playing the race card oughtta stick it to the libs and make you feel a little better hey? or maybe tucker and one of trump's co-defendants can cook up a whackadoodle conspiracy involving the judge and you can all grab your pitchforks and go on a targetted witch hunt for the judge instead so you can forget about your cute little fani willis nothingburger and go pivot off to going all in on the next big wet fart they blow at you.

but don't you worry my friend. you're going to be winning one of these days. but it wasn't today

 

[sickc0d3r]

Uh, no. He is basically saying any of those bodies can investigate. Nice wall of text psycho. VERY long winded way of saying you're wrong <45> <45>

Originally you said "In his ruling, the judge actually says she should be investigated by the state."

Now you're admitting it's, "I didn't find a problem, but the state can offer feedback if it wants to".

I know this day has been hard for you, but you've been wrong lots of times before. You should be able to handle it by now.

 

[Jacket time]

It's fucking over.
Biden was caught talking shit for a 8 mil book deal.

Joe was found to have willfully retained classified documents and shared them.

It's called selective prosecution -- especially after special council Hur found that Biden was sharing classified docs with his ghost writer. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

 

[cottagecheesefan]

It's fucking over.
Biden was caught talking shit for a 8 mil book deal.

Joe was found to have willfully retained classified documents and shared them.

It's called selective prosecution -- especially after special council Hur found that Biden was sharing classified docs with his ghost writer. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

It is like Hur and this judge here are offering off ramps, but they keep wanting to push on. Judge cannon also calling out the documents case.

Alvin Bragg asking for a delay.

Fabi’s willis case collapsing

Maybe the SCOTUS will give jack smith a bump in a couple months, before that case quickly falls apart lol. Appeals already ruled they were in fact over charging 1/6ers. Imagine trying to say Trump cause an insurrection when those cases are being overturned lmao

 

[idrankyourbeer]

It's fucking over.
Biden was caught talking shit for a 8 mil book deal.

Joe was found to have willfully retained classified documents and shared them.

It's called selective prosecution -- especially after special council Hur found that Biden was sharing classified docs with his ghost writer. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

you're posting in the thread regarding fani willis being ruled to have engaged in no unlawful act, and there was no conflict of interest determined to be found, and she will not be removed from the trial as originally petitioned for by the defendants in terms of relief in this motion. it succeeded in the short term for wasting 2 months of time and it ultimately got the rookie prosecutor who has never prosecuted a rico case moved aside. now the fani willis case gets to proceed fani willis remaining at the helm. if and when cheeto benito loses the election your boy is fair dinkum fucked and you know it.

joe biden has nothing to do with this nothingburger motion and he has nothing to do with the georgia rico case either, other than the fact that he won the election and trump didn't want to accept his loss and fuck off so he resorted to engaging in criminal activity just to defraud his country and the elections like a sore little loser because he couldnt have his way.

i think you may have gotten this mistaken for the biden impeachment fanfiction and fantasy thread. how's that one been going lately? has the special counsel decided to charge brandon and remove hunter biden from political office? no, not yet? maybe tomorrow? something about a deep state witch hunt and a two tiered justice system right? are they ready to embarass themselves and that peach mint thingy to a vote on the house floor yet? last i heard that shit just complete fucking died right off after your whole conspiracy got exposed for a bunch of russian bullshit and then it flopped flat on its face and now the republicans are trying to bury this charade of theirs. have they managed to find any evidence of any crimes in that one yet?