As we reported, legal analyst Caroline Polisi said on MSNBC Thursday that the new testimony that contradicted Willis' previous statements was "game over for her" in the election fraud trial against the former president:BooRadley » 16 Feb 2024, 8:19 am » wrote: ↑ MSNBC this AM said she did great on the witness stand...
It would mean the relationship began before Wade was hired in the Georgia election interference case Willis is pursuing against Donald Trump – and could provide a reason for a judge to disqualify them from the case.
Do judges give lawyers a "pass" if they lie under oath in their courtroom?BooRadley » 16 Feb 2024, 5:40 am » wrote: ↑ You obviously didn't watch the testimony..
Her own best friend of 30 years said they had a relationship prior to be hired...
Thoughts?
Skans » 16 Feb 2024, 9:17 am » wrote: ↑ Do judges give lawyers a "pass" if they lie under oath in their courtroom?
Democrat Judges do anything necessary to advance the party agenda.Skans » 16 Feb 2024, 9:17 am » wrote: ↑ Do judges give lawyers a "pass" if they lie under oath in their courtroom?
RebelGator » 16 Feb 2024, 9:33 am » wrote: ↑ Democrat Judges do anything necessary to advance the party agenda.
That's right. The Ga. Supreme Court is watching to see what this judge does, how he handles this situation involving the President of the United States, and a racist conspiracy of state agents to steal tax payer money. You might want to read Cannon 2 and 4 of the Georgia Rules of Judicial Conduct. https://gajqc.gov/wp-content/uploads/si ... t-2020.pdf Trump's lawyers have. I can assure you, the Georgia Supreme Court Justices and Judicial Qualifications Commission have too.Beekeeper » 16 Feb 2024, 10:06 am » wrote: ↑ I wouldn't be so sure on this case that that's going to happen.
Don't forget that the GA Supreme court isn't full of LWNJ's and his actions could EASILY result in an appeal up and he lose massively. NO Judge wants that to happen- Democrat or not.

Here it goes...
Read below.
And I'm not so sure she is "smart" about much at all. Seeing how she invented a crime for the Trump defendants..BooRadley » 16 Feb 2024, 11:47 am » wrote: ↑Here it goes...
She runs the DA office and hires her boyfriend from a law office to investigate and prosecute Trump.
His office get's paid hundreds of thousands of dollars...
And then she and her boyfriend goes on multiple vacations with the $$$ he gets from her office.
It's highly improper and maybe criminal.
This woman is not stupid.
She must have known this wasn't a good idea.
Nice answer.BooRadley » 16 Feb 2024, 11:47 am » wrote: ↑ Here it goes...
She runs the DA office and hires her boyfriend from a law office to investigate and prosecute Trump.
His office get's paid hundreds of thousands of dollars...
And then she and her boyfriend goes on multiple vacations with the $$$ he gets from her office.
It's highly improper and maybe criminal.
This woman is not stupid.
She must have known this wasn't a good idea.
Why couldn’t her office handle the case internally?Beekeeper » 16 Feb 2024, 12:15 pm » wrote: ↑ Read below.
And I'm not so sure she is "smart" about much at all. Seeing how she invented a crime for the Trump defendants..
BooRadley » 16 Feb 2024, 11:47 am » wrote: ↑ Here it goes...
She runs the DA office and hires her boyfriend from a law office to investigate and prosecute Trump.
His office get's paid hundreds of thousands of dollars...
And then she and her boyfriend goes on multiple vacations with the $$$ he gets from her office.
It's highly improper and maybe criminal.
This woman is not stupid.
She must have known this wasn't a good idea.
Her actions weren't inappropriate.BuckNaked » 16 Feb 2024, 12:21 pm » wrote: ↑ does her inappropriate actions cancel the potential wrongs they were looking into?
It doesn't cancel...BuckNaked » 16 Feb 2024, 12:21 pm » wrote: ↑ does her inappropriate actions cancel the potential wrongs they were looking into?
So you hire someone you're dating and he gets hundreds of thousands of tax payer dollars and they go on vacations with the $$..?
Yes they were...
Is that all they did questioned the outcome?BooRadley » 16 Feb 2024, 12:34 pm » wrote: ↑ It doesn't cancel...
No...
But her actions questions everything...
And she'll likely get recused from the case.
And it's highly unlikely this case is even worth pursuing....
Years and years and years ago Trump questioned the outcome of the election.
She wants to pursue a very weak case..
But it helps her social position with Democrats
It's highly improper for any government official to hire a sweetheart for such a lucrative deal...