124
Unsealed Nathan Wade divorce docs do not mention Fulton County DA Fani Willis
(www.fox5atlanta.com)
this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2024
124 points (95.6% liked)
politics
19089 readers
4335 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm genuinely torn on this. I think, whatever the facts are, we should stop acknowledging Trump and Co.'s facts. Honestly, I'm almost at the point that if they said a meteor would crash into the world in 5 days, I wouldn't look up because there's a 99% chance they're lying, telling half-truths, or otherwise trying to waste time.
My thing is, who cares if they were having an affair? I mean, how does that impact the legal case against Donald Trump? The prosecutors still have to present evidence, still have to prove their case, and it really doesn't make a difference if they were rubbing their genitals together or not.
The wife certainly cares, and has a right to know. Marital infidelity is a real problem for the parties involved. I just don't think that includes Trump.
The Trump lawyers' claim is that the DA played favorites to get her boyfriend into a senior position, with a high bill rate, then he returned the favor by funneling money back to her. And that proves that the case is really about enriching the DA, and should be tossed on that basis alone. As you note, this has nothing to do with the case itself. Nor do a few plane tickets denote a kickback scheme. If she was really taking kickbacks, don't you think she'd throw in a few gold bars or something? (That's how they do that shit in Congress....)
If there's anything to it, it should be an ethics investigation into the DA. Since the defense brought it up it seems prudent for the judge to ask for an explanation but what's publically known so far doesn't warrant anything but a finger-wave and a single "tsk".