Okay, and i am reliably informed the decision is sound and reasonable, so, cool but
Why should I care if they’re dating? Which, they broke up awhile ago so - Is it affecting the prosecution somehow? If so, the claimants never argued that, at least successfully.
Were they suppressing evidence together, somehow, despite being on the same side? Were they inappropriately discussing plea deals for people they’re on the same side of? They never said.
The best they had was to say Fani was spending public money on trips and fancy dinners for them - but they never even produced one single piece of evidence that they did so. Yeah they went to Napa valley together, stayed at the Doubletree, and paid out of their own pocket. A fancy vacation that totaled, maybe $3,000? And that was their best evidence?
As far as paying hundreds of thousands, they broke down the contract payments to “about half the market rate for a criminal law attorney” so - ? Wade would be doubling his salary to be let go? I guess that’s - I don’t know what that’s supposed to prove.
I think it was an ill-conceived gambit on the part of one of the co-defendants which the trump legal brain trust seized on and blew up as big as possible. Which was much ado about nothing.
And if there was ever anything that was going to make the DA bear down even harder, however that may play out, that was probably it. So. A bad idea, concluded.
Agreed, them having a relationship shouldn’t even have been an issue. Maybe the court would spend a day to explain to the defense that the court will not deal with conspiracy theories, then on with the show. Giving this nonsense months of attention when none of it is relevant to the case (or defense), should have been enough to move this on almost immediately.
And why would the defense be the ones to bring it up?! If those two were a distraction to each other that’s a win for Trump. But you know they want anyone but her on the other side because she’s actually go at her job.
I mean this seems appropriate. One of the two should have just stepped back from the case (Wade) when they got involved personally.
However, Fani’s decision making throughout has been simply indefensible. This trial is the ONLY trial going on where Trump can’t go to the Supreme Court to get the decision changed. Fani putting this whole thing up for grabs for the sake of a personal relationhship, her decision to go with Wade as council for this case, not just front running this and removing Wade. It all is just so disappointing considering this should have been a slam dunk. Instead she gave media all the ammunition they’ll need to call the ruling ‘corrupt’ and ‘fake’. I mean we have the god damned tapes. She could have just ran this by the book and it would have been a slam dunk. Maybe she could have gone on some dates with the attorney on the cop city trial instead and gotten thrown off that instead.
Its not clear to me how this will impact the overall case moving forward, but its done damage, that’s for certain. Can’t feign ignorance around how important perception is on things like this.
Yep this was the correct call by the judge. It should have been blindingly obvious that this would be the result of them starting their relationship. Yet they went ahead with it anyway and put the whole case at risk. Completely insane decision making on display here.
Plus had they disqualified the case, it would have removed it from her ENTIRE office to be able to take it over and continue. Had she just stepped back, one of her deputies could have taken it over and run with it. This was a risky move, and due to it being the only one Trump can’t quash federally, really scary to have dug her heels in like she did. She’s lucky it didn’t go another way.
Just in case you’re interested if you’re a Chubb Insurance customer I found this document on their public website that lists all of their subsidiary names in the USA and around the globe. file link on their website
@Rapidcreek so the guys that appraised Trump's properties in the fraud case are covering his bail? Well at least now we know what premium Trump paid for the bail: he paid with keeping their dirty secrets.
yea, I’m extremely anti-trump, but i don’t have a problem with this. Unfortunately the American legal system operates on cash bonds, and i have no doubt they charged him a real high rate.
Not at all, Im saying its OK for a bond company to help a bad person get a bond, since that’s part of the american legal system. I would prefer cash bonds be gotten rid of entirely, since a wealthy person who is a flight risk shouldn’t be able to just put money forward, while a poor person stays in jail.
This might not be a popular view here, but I believe the guy. We all know Trump’s dubious history about paying people, I’m sure this guy does, too. This company is large enough that Trump can’t make them go away by ignoring and delaying it.
And, we might end up with Chubb simply taking a bunch of Trump properties. Could we end up with Chubb Tower? That alone might be worth it.
Uh huh, this is the right thing to do, is it? Including provisions to give your special client 30 more days than normal to collect and 30 more days on top of that to disburse to Carroll should the appeal fail.
Insurance companies understand risk. Trump undoubtedly had to put up some serious collateral to secure the bond. Like casinos, insurance companies know how to come out on top of any transaction.
He’s investing in a republican future. Republicans mean more money for people like him. It honestly is a very simple business decision that could lead to big profits in the future.
I might catch flak for this here, but I have watched a lot of the televised proceedings in this case and I think Judge McAfee has been more than fair so far in this case. This sucks but it is a legitimate procedural issue and a judge has to rule on these things. Frankly, I’m disappointed in the prosecution at this point. Between this and the relationship allegations, they have let multiple outside factors interfere in what might have been the best case against Trump for his election interference.
It’s important to note that this was not an exoneration, but rather more procedural. The judge’s argument is that the charges brought are not specific enough as to what elements of their oaths were broken. Now, the prosecutors will either have to drop those charges or refile them in front of a grand jury with more specific charges. The racketeering charges remain and are unaffected by this ruling.
We also still haven’t heard anything on the removal of the prosecutor for an alleged inappropriate relationship. This case is a clusterfuck.
The alleged inappropriate relationship, which was it’s own box of mess all on its own still never indicated why that was prejudicial to the case.
Y’know - the main point of brining it up? Unless the whole point was to create smoke and noise to delay and obfuscate. Or else they just got in there and then - didn’t have anything.
It’s one of those things where it’s obviously intended to derail the case, but I’m still pretty upset with everyone involved for leaving themselves open to this. When you shoot for the king, you better not miss. If you’re not interested in being a super clean goody-goody, don’t take this job. It’s part of the obligations for the important job you chose to do.
But yeah, agreed. I don’t think the defense’s argument is that it would be prejudicial to their case, but rather just arguing that there is other incentive for the prosecutor to be removed. Having the lead prosecutor removed just completely screws a case in the short term.
It’s also important to realize that this is how our justice system works. Participants will rarely file a single charge if there are thirty that may apply - it’s essentially free to file those 29 extra charges and it’s extremely punishing if you file one and choose poorly. The early stages of trial are throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks.
cnbc.com
Hot