Fulton County district attorney is leading a sprawling case against the former president and his allies
The Georgia prosecutor leading a sprawling election interference case against Donald Trump has testified in court about allegations of misconduct levelled against her by the former president and his co-defendants – questions that could potentially disqualify them from the case.
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis began her testimony in an Atlanta courtroom on Thursday after defence attorneys questioned lead prosecutor Nathan Wade about the timeline of their relationship and the expenses they shared.
The attorneys had already admitted to their relationship but firmly rejected the “meritless” and “salacious” allegations as “bad-faith” attempts to see her kicked off a case that Mr Trump has baselessly labelled a conspiracy against him, according to court filings.
Thursday’s hearing is scrutinising allegations that the former couple financially benefited from Ms Willis hiring Mr Wade to prosecute the former president’s case, which charges Mr Trump and more than a dozen co-defendants as part of a “criminal enterprise” to overturn the state’s election results in 2020.
“I’ve been very anxious to have this conversation with you today,” Ms Willis told defence attorney Ashleigh Merchant. “It’s ridiculous that you lied on Monday and yet here we are. … I’m actually surprised that the hearing continued. But since it did, here I am.”
I could see a conflict of interest and I’m disappointed she didn’t recuse herself voluntarily or pick someone else to be involved in the case.
Appearance is everything in this high profile case and it needs to be by the books or else half the country will scream “unfair, rigged, collusion”
Where is the conflict?
The only argument I’ve seen is that she could have artificially extended the case to funnel money to her boyfriend.
The only thing that could let drumpf walk away from this shit, is when our prosecutors make mistakes. Having an ongoing affair between the lead prosecutor and someone she hired, covering it up, and then refusing to step aside after it was found out. These are the mistakes that will let this POS walk free.
Hiring someone you are actively involved with an intimate relationship with? If your sibling works at General Mills you’re immediately disqualified from the cereal box sweepstakes ffs, Willis knows better and should have done better. Especially when it’s a case this big
How does it affect the case?
We’re reading headlines about it, aren’t we? The court is taking time to resolve this allegation (as bullshit as it’s looking) instead of what the case is actually about - prosecuting Trump.
America is on a deadline before the election, but the slow wheels of justice have to turn over this rock now because there’s enough evidence wrapped up in the claim to warrant a look, if only to disprove the allegations
The district attorney could have feelings left over from the affair and could possibly want to influence the case to see her lover win.
Edit:
Okay I’m being down voted.
Preface: I hate Trump as much as all of you. I think he is a treasonous rapist lying twice impeached failed businessman dumb man child.
However, consider the [impossible] hypothetical scenario where an anonymous source leaks key information specifically to the DA proving Trump’s innocence. She is obligated to disclose this information to the court.
However, if she has plans to marry the prosecution attorney and wants him to be famous for winning the case against trump, she might not disclose that information.
These are the kinds of mental gymnastics the Republican party uses to justify throwing the case out, and this is why she should have recused herself.
Again- they’re on the same side of the case. So yeah, she would want to influence the case they both want Trump to lose.
I edited my comment to elaborate since I received so many downvotes and more than one reply. Feel free to read it or not IDC.
I think you’re confused as to what a district attorney does. Either that or what a lead prosecutor is. The DA inherently wants the lead prosecutor to win and has no methods to influence the outcome (beyond just directly helping them build a strong argument).
I edited my comment to elaborate since I received so many downvotes and more than one reply. Feel free to read it or not IDC.