[quote=“known_thespian, post:4, topic:254199”]
The problem was that she created a conflict of interest by having a personal relationship with a contract employee in a subordinate role, so GA tax dollars were, in effect, flowing to someone whom she had a personal interest in keeping on the payroll,
You know damn well that if it had been a man having an affair with a subordinate, there would have been no complaint. The woman involved would be blamed.
This his just more of Trumps bending the judicial system in ridiculous ways to favor his criminality. Lawyers who file frivolous lawsuits on his behalf should be sanctioned or disbarred.
“You know damn well that if it had been a man having an affair with a subordinate, there would have been no complaint.”
Begging your pardon, no, I don’t “know” that. In your hypothetical, a man could be having an affair with a man - do you think Roman et al would have turned a blind eye to it?
So MEN can be ‘inappropriate’ but find JESUS and be nominated to the DOD. Women need to be slapped down and put in their place. The nerve of those women. I am filled with rage.
If you look at the majority opinion, you’ll will see, or really not see, any real case law being cited. In contrast, the lone dissenter wrote an opinion based on case law.
Take home is that the majority just made it up, just like the Supreme Court in the Trump immuni-baloney case.
Do you actually know Georgia’s RICO statute, or how it’s been applied in the past? It is far broader than the federal statute, and it’s sort of overreach incarnate.
I am aware. And do you actually know that SCOGA is very bad and would readily find that it had been misapplied if trump were to ever be convicted of it?
Willis should have just charged him with the misdemeanor that actually applies to trump’s solicitation of election fraud and be done with it.
Yeah, I live in Georgia. Having a lousy Supreme Court doesn’t indicate an issue with the case so much as with the court. We see this at the federal level on the regular.
Yes, as you pointed to many many times (to great negative reactions as I recall) and as anyone with a background in such things (and able to take off the political rose-colored lens and partisan tribal cheerleading) could see.
All the Identarian rubbish, the equally black NY team moved their legal chess pieces forward more effectively, without huge over-reaches and major fumbles.
Whatever the end result out of any of the NY cases, on their initial execution, they were vastly more effective.
Lesson: cold blooded professional legalism and not playing the Internet sugar-rush crowd is more effective long-term play.
Actually that’s just an unfounded assertion based on partisan posturing and identity politics.
The examples of male malfeasance getting them turfed out were cited in the past - using out-rigth gendered asserttions are not correcting gender issues, you’re just playing fun-house mirror and inverting the foolishness. (and that’s one of the empty habits that’s undercutting real observations on bias)
A question for you (as a TX lawyer): By the standard set here, shouldn’t we also expect all of corrupt TX AG Ken Paxton’s cases to be tossed as well? I think, unfortunately, we’re letting the right set a hypocritical standard here that they themselves pay no attention to. If it were a GOP prosecutor and a Dem defendant, I believe there’d have been no issue here–not in my state, nor in yours.
I don’t think it has any bearing on the merits, that is, on whether Roman, Rudy, Trumpigula, Limburgerbro et al engaged in the activities for which they were indicted. But we citizens do have an interest in a system of justice in which criminal trials are fair, defendants are afforded due process, etc (I realize in these times, this may seem quaint) and if a prosecution is tainted by conflict of interest, defendants can contest it.
