And look at this: Fanni was warned but chopped off the head (fired) the messenger.



https://www.washingtonexaminer...suse-funds-concerns/

During the conversation, then-employee Amanda Timpson told Willis that campaign aide Michael Cuffee intended to use part of a $488,000 federal grant, which was intended to counter local gang activity, to pay for unrelated matters such as computers and travel expenses.

Willis later apologized to Timpson during their discussion, admitting that Cuffee “failed” her administration. But just 56 days later, the district attorney fired Timpson and had her escorted out of her office by seven armed investigators, Timpson told the Free Beacon.

When Timpson filed a whistleblower complaint in 2022 alleging wrongful termination, Willis issued a statement saying Timpson was a “holdover from the prior administration” who was fired because of her “failure to meet the standards of the new administration.”

More at link

O'Keefe is back at it.

https://twitter.com/JamesOKeef.../1752786076320600511

Trump already lost the case that determined the guilt or innocence of the sexual assault allegation. The recent E. Jean Carroll case was strictly to determine defamation liability for Trump's public post trial statements calling Ms. Carroll a liar. During the trial the judge would not allow any exculpatory evidence of his innocence of the original sexual assault allegation. That's because that issue had already been adjudicated. To borrow an expression - under the law you don't get a second bite at the apple of guilt or innocence of the original charge. The judge did allow information by the defense calling into question the alleged damages by E. Jean Carroll. For example, the judge did allow the defense to maintain that Ms. Carroll really suffered no loss since she was now more famous etc.

To be clear, my own view is the original charge of the assault is bogus. Yes this is part of the wholly unjustified legal assault underway against President Trump.

quote:

Originally posted by Fed161:
Trump already lost the case that determined the guilt or innocence of the sexual assault allegation. The recent E. Jean Carroll case was strictly to determine defamation...

Thanks for this insight. I am assuming you are an attorney and have three questions:

1. Was the original, bogus, trial held in NYC too?

2. Was this judge the same one who presided over the original trial?

3. What effect will the judge's undisclosed prior relationship with the prosecuting attorney on the success of gaining an appeal?

.

quote:

Originally posted by Fed161:
Trump already lost the case that determined the guilt or innocence of the sexual assault allegation. The recent E. Jean Carroll case was strictly to determine defamation liability for Trump's public post trial statements calling Ms. Carroll a liar.

Trump wasn't found guilty of anything, that is a criminal term, that matters with this wretch are all civil. Carroll v. Trump. This wasn't the People of NY or U.S.A. v. Trump. The burden here is a preponderance of evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the Judge put his fingers on the scale to get Carroll's lawyers to that 51% of evidence in her favor. Lot of Appeals issues before Ole Jean sees a dime.

[/QUOTE]
Thanks for this insight. I am assuming you are an attorney and have three questions:

1. Was the original, bogus, trial held in NYC too?

2. Was this judge the same one who presided over the original trial?

3. What effect will the judge's undisclosed prior relationship with the prosecuting attorney on the success of gaining an appeal?
.[/QUOTE]

No I am not an attorney. My post was based on information provided by Jonathan Turley and other legal scholars who are not reflexively anti-Trump. I have heard the explanation I provided from a variety of of other sources as well. I am confident it is accurate. Also, it just makes sense.

I have followed the case close enough to know that the answer to your questions 1 and 2 is yes. Regarding question 3, I don't know the answer. I would think the answer should be yes. But I would say that it's going to depend almost entirely on who hears the appeal.

Spunk639's post is entirely accurate. I agree completely. My post should have said that Trump was found liable, not that he was found guilty. My bad. What I should have said was that Trump's liability has already been determined and his lawyers don't get a second bite at the liability issue.

I am an Attorney and Trump can get a second bite at the apple, if there was an error that made his trial unfair, even in a civil matter. Improper jury selection, excluded evidence, limited defenses, failure to disclose. There's also rule of law errors, all can be explored and presented to an appeals court, who can deny, reduce the award or verdict, or set aside the verdict.

quote:

Originally posted by spunk639:
I am an Attorney and Trump can get a second bite at the apple, if there was an error that made his trial unfair, even in a civil matter. Improper jury selection, excluded evidence, limited defenses, failure to disclose. There's also rule of law errors, all can be explored and presented to an appeals court, who can deny, reduce the award or verdict, or set aside the verdict.

I would 100 percent defer to your expertise. However, the trial that recently concluded was solely to determine defamation damages. Of course Trump can get a second bite at the apple on APPEAL of the original liability and/or defamation damages cases. But my understanding is that the judge would not allow presenting of exculpatory evidence of liability because that trial was solely to determine damages for defamation, not to determine liability. Or in your opinion was the judge wrong. Should he have allowed another look at liability at the defamation trial. This was not an appeal of the liability issue. The legal commentary that I heard was the judge was correct to only allow testimony relevant to the defamation issue, not the liability issue.

Liability was determined, however the Judge failed to disclose his prior relationship with opposing counsel to the Defendant Trump. The whole thing is now fertile for being flipped on appeal.

quote:

Originally posted by spunk639:

The whole thing is now furtile for being flipped on appeal.

Is "furtile" a legal term (I have never heard that word), or is it a type, with "fertile" the intended word?

furtile: serving no useful purpose

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:
furtile: serving no useful purpose

FIFY

Hate auto check whe typing........ughh

quote:

Originally posted by spunk639:

Hate auto check whe typing........ughh

The guy who invented auto-correct died last week. His funnel will be tomato.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:
[The guy who invented auto-correct died last week. His funnel will be tomato.

LOL!

.

Fani Opens Up: Admits To Relationship With Dude She Hired To Get Trump

https://www.zerohedge.com/poli...oena-devastates-fani

Fani Willis, the Fulton County, Georgia DA whose personal life has completely upstaged the impact of her election interference case against Donald Trump, has admitted to having a "personal relationship" with a prosecutor she hired to go after the former president - Nathan Wade, the NY Times reports.

The admission came almost a month after allegations of an “improper, clandestine personal relationship” between the two surfaced in a motion from one of Mr. Trump’s co-defendants. The motion seeks to disqualify both prosecutors and Ms. Willis’s entire office from handling the case — an effort that, if successful, would likely sow chaos for an unprecedented state criminal prosecution of a former president.

“While the allegations raised in the various motions are salacious and garnered the media attention they were designed to obtain, none provide this Court with any basis upon which to order the relief they seek,” Ms. Willis’s filing said, adding that “the personal relationship between” Ms. Willis and the prosecutor, Nathan J. Wade, “has never involved direct or indirect financial benefit” to Ms. Willis.

Are free tickets to Napa, Florida, and the Caribbean considered an indirect financial benefit? Because according to records filed in the Wade divorce, Wade bought tickets for he and Fani to travel on both Norwegian and Royal Caribbean cruise lines.

AND:

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) has slapped a subpoena on Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Fani Willis for failing to comply with document requests related to allegations that Willis fired a whistleblower who tried to stop a top campaign aide from misusing federal funds.

More at link

quote:

Originally posted by synthplayer:
I think my Democrat friends would identify with this woman.

Never Trumper

Pretty sure she's on the Babylon Bee's staff. Lol.

Donald Trump is a good man! Anyone that has met and spoken with him knows this. He is genuine, very gracious and extremely generous with his time. He loves this country, holds no prejudices and has worked tirelessly on behalf ALL Americans in his quest to Make America Great Again! DJT, the Greatest President of my Lifetime!