Fogbow

https://luciantruscott.substack.com/p/i ... akPQSmikus

Really excellent commentary by Lucian K. Truscott IV. He aligns with Portia's (and my) views. For those unfamiliar, he is a descendant of Thomas Jefferson.

To be clear, I think both views are valid. Life is complex sometimes.

I just think calling out racism and sexism in righteous anger after years of attacks is a good thing.

SuzieC wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2024 8:02 pm https://luciantruscott.substack.com/p/i ... akPQSmikus

Really excellent commentary by Lucian K. Truscott IV. He aligns with Portia's (and my) views. For those unfamiliar, he is a descendant of Thomas Jefferson.

Also a pretty good novelist and former Village Voice journalist; a West Pointer who resigned his commission and took a general discharge when his journalism articles in early military service pissed off some folks who wanted to send him off to a front-line unit in Vietnam in the hopes that he'd die and stop being a troublemaker; and specifically with regards to the TJ descent, the lead descendent who fought for the rights of Jefferson's descendents through Sally Hemmings to be included in the family lineage association and all the little perks that come along with it.

I consider him one of my few remaining figures to admire.

p0rtia wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2024 8:29 pm To be clear, I think both views are valid. Life is complex sometimes.

I just think calling out racism and sexism in righteous anger after years of attacks is a good thing.

Hard not to see righteous anger in Fani's situation.

SuzieC wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2024 8:53 pm

p0rtia wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2024 8:29 pm To be clear, I think both views are valid. Life is complex sometimes.

I just think calling out racism and sexism in righteous anger after years of attacks is a good thing.

Hard not to see righteous anger in Fani's situation.

I'm with you sisters! Why should an intelligent and (afaik, cartainly assumedly in the context) honest black woman doing an important job be subject to character assassination by powerful rich white criminals and be expected to say "yass, Missy Merchant", "no, massa", to play the role of quarry in their blood hunt.

As Ms Willis said: she was not on trial. Of course she was angry and she had every right to be and reason to show it. To hell with the apathetic (white male!) judge and the criminals' lickspittles and lackeys trying to bully her!

The (mainly white male) lawyers here might think that the correct formal execution of the pas-de-deux, pirouettes and pliés of the courtroom dance are more important than the people involved and the undercurrents of racism, bullying and abuse of power and privilege. No. No. No.

As I wrote earlier, I doubt that what was said in the courtroom would or could affect the decision that the judge has made beforehand. But perhaps the judge will now be more aware that if he were to (try to?) remove Ms Willis from the case, that would raise a stink at such an unjust, unfair, inappropriate, unnecessary and prima facie racist move.

Beautifully and powerful written, Sam!!!!!

"Why should an intelligent and (afaik, cartainly assumedly in the context) honest black woman doing an important job be subject to character assassination by powerful rich white criminals and be expected to say "yass, Missy Merchant", "no, massa", to play the role of quarry in their blood hunt."

"The (mainly white male) lawyers here might think that the correct formal execution of the pas-de-deux, pirouettes and pliés of the courtroom dance are more important than the people involved and the undercurrents of racism, bullying and abuse of power and privilege. No. No. No."

My take on Judge McAfee is based upon what he wrote earlier about the two prong test that defendants had to prove in this case. Mehopes it was a warning about the path Roman was entering. His other rulings have seemed sensible to me. I think he will rule against the motion and keep Fani on the case.

That keeping cash around is known to many Southerners. Fani's and her father's explanation was likely eye opening to many.

I would not have advised Fani to conduct herself as she did, but there are exceptions to every rule. This may be the Fani Exception.

p0rtia wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2024 8:29 pm To be clear, I think both views are valid. Life is complex sometimes.

I just think calling out racism and sexism in righteous anger after years of attacks is a good thing.

True dat. Ol' Wifehorn is a permanent lifelong fan of Fani and was rocking with excitement about the truth and justice of her testimony. But she's also and always a permanent lifelong fan of Sterngard because of past events. I told her, he's not looking at it like a black woman. He's looking at it like a lawyer, and from a lawyer's standpoint everything he said is true. You answer the question, the whole question, and nothing but the question. Then stop. STOP.

OW: But she energized every woman, and especially every black woman, who sees it. Every woman in America needs to see that.
Me: Yeah, but what was her goal, to energize a segment of the voting population, or to win the motion in front of the judge? Because a lawyer is supposed to try to win. She can energize people outside of the witness chair.

Life is complex sometimes.

Foggy wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2024 11:00 am Because a lawyer is supposed to try to win. She can energize people outside of the witness chair.

Black woman first. Lawyer second. This was not an issue of law. It was attempted bullying under a cloak of legal verbiage.

SuzieC wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2024 8:02 pm https://luciantruscott.substack.com/p/i ... akPQSmikus

Really excellent commentary by Lucian K. Truscott IV. He aligns with Portia's (and my) views. For those unfamiliar, he is a descendant of Thomas Jefferson.

I wasn't going to post this but since the subject has been brought up....

Thank you for the article. It was very enlightening. I didn't see all of Mr. Floyd's testimony but I was very impressed with what I saw. I have been appalled at how this judge has let this farce play out in public. It needs to end and the trial needs to move forward. This is a racist sideshow and it needs to stop. If you want to tsk tsk at Fani Willis from your very, very ivory tower that her behavior and performance was unprofessional that's your right. Would anyone want to guess how many times she has been threatened and called a dumb n-word since this all started? I would bet we'd be surprised at the number.

And let's don't compare her to Michael Avenatti. That's not fair. He was a god damned thief. We only liked him because the enemy of my enemy ... He wore out his welcome quite quickly.

All of it. NB. Two things can both be true at the same time.

Moving on -

I was as impressed with Willis's dad as everyone else on Friday. Holy crap. Watching him sit there, eloquently explaining to the Court, by example, how racism was poisoning that insane hearing, was a true joy. He and Willis herself were so essential to bring sanity to what was going on. I note that he initially intended to appear by zoom, so the fact that he flew in from CA, presumably at a moment's notice, to unexpectedly appear live, was a lovely parallel to Willis's epic appearance on Thursday.

On Judge McAfee. Having watched every one of McAfee's hearings, I don't think he is unfair. IMO this was his inexperience showing, literally an attempt to be fair resulting in an appallingly unfair opening-up of the sex lives of public servants, for no discernible reason. FTR, Cross (for Willis) tried hard to get the testimony given in camera, and failed.

Listening to one of that gaggle of white male lawyers argue that they had a right to know the date the DA first had sex with the Special Prosecutor, because the fraud exception to attorney-client privilege was in play since Wade had committed adultery, which is still a (unconstitutional) misdemeanor in GA, was a particularly low point in Friday afternoon.

Using a stupid-ass argument that Willis had a conflict of interest because she hired Wade (after at least one other person had turned her down--clever ruse, that) so that he could give her money (even they don't claim more than $10,000) and that the two colluded to prolong the case--using all that as an excuse to ask a person if she kept a love nest and when she first fucked her colleague in it, and if she had included the meals Wade had paid for on her financial records was grossly inappropriate and an example of EXACTLY what we outsiders get upset about when we watch criminals like fuckhead get away with ANYTHING, in part by destroying the lives the people who are trying to see justice done.

I hope McAfee is ashamed of himself this morning. I think he started to see the pitfalls as the hearing progressed. I hope that when he consults other judges (and hopefully not of the same ilk as the good-ole'-boys network that was in his courtroom yesterday), they will point out the fundamental error, and he will learn from it.

I really appreciate your reporting and commentary on this hearing p0rtia, especially as I haven't had time (or inclination) to stare at a screen for as many hours.

Thx too to other commenters, experts and lay.

For those interested, Fans Willis’ father’s full testimony - 39+ minute video. Not being aware of Willis’ history I was shocked by some of the racism detailed by her father.

I support this idea. It would take much of the nonsense off the table and let DA Willis keep things moving. Wade doesn't have experience in this area anyway, and it would defuse some of the MAGAs talking points. Of course, they'll scream it proves their point, but they are going to scream no matter what.

Nathan Wade should step down from Georgia Trump case even if not disqualified: experts
Carl Gibson, AlterNet

Special prosecutor Nathan Wade — who admitted on the witness stand last week to dating Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis — should recuse himself from the prosecution of former President Donald Trump and his associates to preserve the integrity of the investigation, according to a recent column by two legal experts.

In the legal publication Lawfare, lawyer Anna Bower and editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes both argued that while there is no basis to disqualify Willis based on the evidence brought by an attorney representing one of Trump's co-defendants, the lingering questions surrounding Wade and his relationship with Willis are a distraction from the historic and unprecedented RICO prosecution of the former president.

They clarify that Wade's dismissal is still necessary even if Judge Scott McAfee — who is overseeing the proceedings — doesn't disqualify Willis and Wade from the case. "While the evidence does not support disqualifying the office or Willis, Wade has displayed a sufficient lack of candor with the courts that he is not a credible figure to continue to represent the state in this case," Bowers and Wittes wrote.

"While this conduct doesn’t create the conflict of interest that the defendants alleged in their motion, it does taint the prosecution if he remains involved with it. Willis herself needs to remove Wade from her team, even if McAfee finds no basis to do so."

https://www.rawstory.com/nathan-wade-sh ... d-experts/

Article: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/se ... ton-county

And who should Fulton Cty get to replace Wade? Someone with the RICO experience the above author wants, since Wade's other extensive experience is not enough?

When is this case starting up again?

I ran across this. SP Nathan Wade has filed a motion to prevent Bradley from appearing before Judge McAfee in camera claiming that McAfee has already ruled multiple times that what testimony he might give has been ruled privileged multiple times.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... amera-exam

Hmm. Dated today. My understanding is that the in camera meeting happened Tuesday. I guess not (or Wade would not have bothered?).

Too also, RC: Last Friday. McAfee said that closing arguement, 15 minutes each, would take place Friday or early next week.

LIstening to today's Lawfare podcast.

They're saying that the Bradley in camera meeting has not yet taken place.

PS Love them to bits!

Questioning today of Wade's former law partner. Turnip's folks are trying to use him to pin down a timeline on when Willis and Wade began their relationship. Lots of the same questions which the judge finally put a stop to. All those defense attorneys were pretty snippy but the witness stuck to his guns. I think it came down to a combination of vague memories (I mean, can you recall when some friends started a relationship? Willis and Ward met at a professional conference and this guy probably wondered aloud if that's when it began. but it sounds like gossip and "I wonder" turning into "they did" down the telephone trail).

Some of the defense attorneys Zoomed in. One forgot his pants. Who takes their pants off in their law office when they know they're having a zoom appearance? Or ever?

https://www.meidastouch.com/news/lawyer ... wn-on-zoom

Double posting so sue me. The guy on the stand today, Wade's ex-partner is named Bradley (couldn't remember his name).

This short little thread from Katie Phang summarizes it better than I did. Bradley was a gossip...and it's come back to bite him...AND, unfortunately, throw some sand in the works of the RICO case.

Katie is being kind.

What a shit-show.

The image of Sadow, fuckhead's att., who doxxed Willis and Wade over the weekend, being an arrogant S.O.B. whilst questioning Bradley about details he had already testified to, was disgusting.

The only smart thing that happened today was that Bradley's att. did not cross. So Bradley got to take his sorry ass out of the courtroom to see if he has a career left.

And McAfee has agreed, if needed (?), to take testimony on Wade's cell tower pings on Friday. Because that won't be another can of worms, oh, no. JHK.

And boy does it piss me off that nobody has, to date, pointed out that it doesn't matter a fuck when Wills and Wade started dating. Like they couldn't have come up with this stupid plan if they were just friends? Oh, wait, no, they couldn't, because it's fucking nuts, whether they were dating, or good friends, or nefarious colleagues. I hope McAfee someday gains the wisdom to see how destructive his decisions have been.

I ask again, as a voice screaming in the wilderness, whytf do the cell phone records matter to anything? This whole shitshow is nothing but a salacious, racist, misogynoir attack on a black female prosecutor. It would never happen to a white male and especially not a white male Republican. Look at Matt Schlapp. He has been accused of sexual assault and grabbing the crotches of young interns. Yet he is still heading the CPAC. Does the media run endless gossipy, salacious stories about him?

p0rtia wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2024 5:55 pm Katie is being kind.

What a shit-show.

The image of Sadow, fuckhead's att., who doxxed Willis and Wade over the weekend, being an arrogant S.O.B. whilst questioning Bradley about details he had already testified to, was disgusting.

The only smart thing that happened today was that Bradley's att. did not cross. So Bradley got to take his sorry ass out of the courtroom to see if he has a career left.

And McAfee has agreed, if needed (?), to take testimony on Wade's cell tower pings on Friday. Because that won't be another can of worms, oh, no. JHK.

And boy does it piss me off that nobody has, to date, pointed out that it doesn't matter a fuck when Wills and Wade started dating. Like they couldn't have come up with this stupid plan if they were just friends? Oh, wait, no, they couldn't, because it's fucking nuts, whether they were dating, or good friends, or nefarious colleagues. I hope McAfee someday gains the wisdom to see how destructive his decisions have been.

The issue is of
Course did they lie on their affidavits as to when the affair began. I’ve thus far heard not read anything that shows any evidence, much less proof, that they did.

I have no idea why this judge is allowing this shit to continue. “Hopefully” it’s to let them get whatever they want in the record and then show they had full
Opportunity and didn’t prove their allegations so suck it. We’ll see

Because having sex makes you a traitor and you can only conspire to hurt the Wonderful Trump if you are in Flagrante Delicto.

Really, it's just to humiliate the persons that Hurt Turnip by waving their dirty laundry in the air. They did the same to Clinton. to Anthony Wiener, to Al Franken, to Hunter Biden, etc. If you stop Republicans expect to have your penis shown on live television whether its true or not.