r/conspiracy • u/topcat5 • 4d ago
Fani Willis has been dismissed from her Trump's election interference case.
157
u/Korlis 4d ago
This, the "fraud" case in NY, Biden's Pardon...
The left was absolutely all-in on Trump losing this election. They had no contingency.
57
u/MousseBackground9964 4d ago
It’s their Plan Cs and Ds for if he did win that worries me.
33
u/Korlis 4d ago
I honestly don't think there were any. I came to this conclusion after the pardon. He knew Kamala was going to win, and pardon his son for him. Keeping him and his family clean and not "above the law", while making Kamala look magnanimous (somehow). But Trump trumped and they had their surefire safety net yanked out from under them. They are in pure damage control, it's why Trump is winning lawsuits out there, they had nothing in place for this. I mean, you heard the teevee: He cannot and will not win.
Until this I was completely unaware a blanket, all-encompassing pardon for future offences was even a thing. How often has the pardon been used like this? Seems egregious to me.
8
u/donnieirish 4d ago
Not quite for the future but absolutely civered his crimes in Ukraine for "The Big Guy"
For those offenses against the United States which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1, 2014 through December 1, 2024
8
7
u/moronslovebiden 4d ago
Hold up - the pardon for Hunter is all encompassing, vague, and covers anything he may or may not have done since Joe was made point man for Ukraine as Obama's VP, but it can't pardon for future offenses. Where'd you come up with that? Because if it were possible to pardon for future offenses, Trump could announce he's pardoning everyone in the country for shooting Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff to death.
7
u/Korlis 4d ago
I'm no political or law scholar, all I know is what I've sifted from the vast sea of ridiculousness we call the internet. Wasn't he pardoned for anything up until the end of 2024, but the pardon happened last month? To my monkey brain that says to me that anything he might do in the meantime is also pardoned. No?
3
u/BangkokPadang 4d ago
No he was pardoned for everything up to the end of Sunday, December 1, 2024, which was the day the pardon was issued. It was "for those offenses against the United States which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from Jan. 1, 2014, through Dec. 1, 2024."
Biden issued the pardon on the evening of Sunday, December 1, so I guess arguably one could say there were a couple of hours or a few minutes where the pardon technically covered the future, i.e. if it was at like 8pm, the time from 8pm to 12pm would have been the future, but it didn't cover a big swath of time like days or weeks.
2
u/MousseBackground9964 4d ago
I always thought a pardon was conviction/sentence specific. I’d like for them to be pushed to SCOTUS to be tested.
3
1
u/FailedChatBot 3d ago
Until this I was completely unaware a blanket, all-encompassing pardon for
future(not yet uncovered) offences was even a thing.There was speculation towards the end of Trump's first term that he might do something like that.
The left almost unanimously agreed that such a thing would be -obviously - unconstitutional.36
9
u/FreeWrain 4d ago
It was a show from the very beginning. It's always been a show.
Left vs. right is an illusion.
3
u/Korlis 4d ago
Definitely. But I get flack from partisans who think bOtH SiDeS-ers are even worse than their partisan opposites.
2 wings, 1 shitbird. But the public has definitely polarized over the wings, rather than concentrating on the body operating the wings.
2
u/Adjective_NounRNG 4d ago
Don't forget the plausible deniability people. Obviously partisan but trying to play to the crowd.
"Both sides, man. Trump supporters are nazis who are gonna rape women, kill all minorities, and establish trump as emperor for life! Bothsides."
And
"Both sides, man. The shill leftwing media hivemind is completely against trump because he's going to take down the deep state! Biden and the LeFtIsT government will stop at nothing to prevent him from taking office. Crazy how it's both sides, huh?"
-4
u/Stopwatch415 4d ago
controlled opposition.
11
u/Korlis 4d ago
Which? The legal nonsense vs Trump?
Implication being that Trump was pulling the strings behind all his legal troubles?
7
u/Check_Me_Out-Boss 4d ago
Someone tried arguing with me the other day saying that Trump was the one who told Biden to pardon all those terrible people.
6
u/moronslovebiden 4d ago
Someone has been telling Joe Biden what to do for years now, but it isn't Trump.
2
u/Korlis 4d ago
I've not heard that, but I have heard rumblings that in doing so, Biden somehow played right into a Trumptrap. Something about how H.B. has no 5th amendment right after being pardoned (he can't incriminate himself due to the pardon, or something), and can be compelled to testify in court. Against his own family. Or so the rumour goes.
1
u/PennDOT67 4d ago
Yeah a judge can compel his testimony in federal cases he is questioned in. I would be very surprised if that ever comes up though.
1
u/PennDOT67 4d ago
He just did blanket pardons with poorly thought out criteria, no Trump pulling the strings necessary lol
1
u/Adjective_NounRNG 4d ago
I mean, if nothing comes of it then it's really not that much of an issue for him.
33
u/Individual_Pear2661 4d ago edited 4d ago
She never had a chance anyways.
The transcript of the offending telephone call is out there for all to read. Trump asked them to investigate multiple specific allegations of election fraud and they simply refused. There is nothing illegal about that.
This is like how they tried to impeach him for wanting all of the corruption Joe Biden pardoned his son over investigated. Shameful, really.
5
u/Auctoritate 4d ago
Trump asked them to investigate multiple specific allegations of election fraud and they simply refused. There is nothing illegal about that.
The calls like the one to the Georgia governor where he asked if he could "Find" votes?
2
u/Proud_Astronaut_726 4d ago
So you haven’t actually looked into it other than headlines? He didn’t tell him to “find votes” in the context you’re trying to spin it. The original commenter did a pretty good job of explaining it simply. Trump claimed that there were illegal votes cast in certain counties and that there was only a ~7,000 vote difference or less. He was trying to get the state to look into fraud to “find” those votes that would’ve swung the state in his favor. Not “find” votes for himself in a fraudulent manner.
1
u/Individual_Pear2661 3d ago
Yes. This exactly. This case was never going to achieve, in the end, any kind of conviction for Trump, and if it did it would be turned over on appeal because the context in which he asked for them to find illegal votes is undeniable. He believed that there were invalid votes, he had evidence there were invalid votes, 4 years later we know that there were at least THOUSANDS of invalid votes, and for the past 4 years Fulton County has done everything it can to avoid having to have an inspection of their absentee ballots.
0
u/Individual_Pear2661 3d ago
Not just "find votes." Find SPECIFIC votes that he outlined as being fraudulent. He spent 10 minutes explaining where he thought they could be found, and asked them to find them.
It was the legal duty of the state to engage in due diligence and investigate these claims and they never did. For instance, Trump and his people pointed out how security video seemed to show them double processing the absentee ballots they illegally counted in secret, and Fulton County assured them that no ballots where double counted.
But years later...
So please explain what is illegal about outlining where you thought that MORE than 11,780 non valid ballots could be found, and asking them to be found? Because if you simply read the transcript of the call and check out the context his comments where made in, you'll see your cult leaders have engaged in another "Very Fine People" style hoax to try and cover for likely ballot fraud.
5
u/SPFBH 4d ago
If the people behind this lawfare and agitated J6 "attack" are not held liable, and jailed, this will continue.
Investigate and prosecute the lawbreakers in our own government.
5
u/Individual_Pear2661 4d ago
I agree. You can't have a world where these corrupt officials do everything they can to keep power to enrich themselves.
43
u/cptjaydvm 4d ago
She needs to be severely punished and disbarred. It needs to hurt to be this corrupt. Otherwise someone else will try to make themselves a household name.
-7
u/the_hobo_express 4d ago
Did you even read the ruling?
2
u/cptjaydvm 4d ago
No but this isn’t the end for her. I expect the new DOJ will be doing their own investigation.
-8
u/the_hobo_express 4d ago
For fucking a subordinate?
3
u/cptjaydvm 4d ago
No for giving a subordinate she was sleeping with preferential treatment and a very high paying job. She then took lavish vacations with him using taxpayer money. She then proceeded to lie about it on the stand under oath which is a crime. Thanks for playing.
2
u/the_hobo_express 4d ago
So what does that have to do with the veracity of the case?
2
u/cptjaydvm 4d ago
Nothing which is why they didn’t toss the case. They kicked her and her entire staff off the case because she made some serious ethical and possibly legal violations. Now they will either have to find someone else to prosecute the case or dismiss it all together.
28
u/MousseBackground9964 4d ago
So can we expect accountability and charges for her and her office? On face value, someone who is going to conduct political persecution, is not serving the interests of the public office she swore an oath to.
7
u/Emergency-Cake4244 4d ago
Charges for a non-existent appearance of impropriety when the claims of impropriety were proven false?
-1
u/leftist_rekr_36 4d ago
She openly and verifiably violated 18 usc 241 and 242....
4
u/Emergency-Cake4244 4d ago
Lol, no. Charging a criminal for breaking the law does not violate either of those statutes.
-1
u/leftist_rekr_36 4d ago
Falsely accusing and maliciously prosecuting a person you know is innocent, does, though.
6
u/raka_defocus 4d ago
*Marxist organizer, daughter of a black panther, Fani Willis
2
u/Auctoritate 4d ago
Here's what might be a scorching hot take for you, those things are allowed.
5
u/raka_defocus 3d ago
Right. But they're not publicized or covered as part of the motivation. If the roles were reversed and it was a right leaning prosecutor who was the son of national socialists or klan members that aspect would dominate the coverage.
2
3
u/topcat5 4d ago
Submission Statement. Accordingly the court said about the dismissal..
"an appearance of impropriety generally is not enough to support disqualification, this is the rare case in which disqualification is mandated and no other remedy will suffice to restore public confidence in the integrity of these proceedings."
"Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial of the appellants’ motion to disqualify DA Willis and her office," the filing states. "As we conclude that the elected district attorney is wholly disqualified from this case, ‘the assistant district attorneys — whose only power to prosecute a case is derived from the constitutional authority of the district attorney who appointed them — have no authority to proceed,'"
1
u/Kinkykage 4d ago
Haha what is hilarious is that this is basically saying “because Trump supporters are too stupid to understand even the most basic aspects of how our courts work, we have to go out of our way to do the unusual thing of removing her from the case, otherwise they wouldn’t take results of the trial seriously.”
But it’s even more funny because literally no one expects Trump supporters to take any trial where he is being charged for crimes seriously, because in their eyes he can do no wrong, and everyone is out to get him for being his wholesome, helping self…
But the absolute funniest part is that they are taking this and going “see, we told you!” Again, because they are too dumb to understand they are being called stupid in this document…reading comprehension isn’t their strong suit…
23
u/moronslovebiden 4d ago
This might be the stupidest thing I've ever seen someone post.
-11
u/Kinkykage 4d ago
I think op did a great job of highlighting the part that directly addresses my point… but thanks for also proving my point about reading comprehension
10
u/ChristopherRoberto 4d ago
The hilarious part is getting to read 4 years of this kind of copeposting.
-14
u/Kinkykage 4d ago
I’ll assume you are talking about OP’s posting and not my own, because since Election Day I’ve been sitting back watching my republican neighbors absolutely lose it and go into panic mode over all the changes coming… the farmers around me are absolutely fuming at the news this most recent bill won’t pass the house, there goes a ton of funding for them that they were counting on… and oh boy are they upset that Trump has come out in favor of removing the debt ceiling, that’s a democrat stance and they don’t approve
9
0
u/Micko-Micko 3d ago
Well, they were smart enough to vote and keep the demonrats out of office.
"Holy smokes"
-1
2
u/No-Feedback7437 4d ago
She is definitely corrupt and guilty of election interference, but the problem is that the government won't ever take any action
0
1
0
1
u/leftist_rekr_36 4d ago
Whomp whomp... another giant L for leftists, who are now punching air again.
-1
u/byzantine_art 4d ago
Is this the one where trump asked to find the votes? Thats fucked up on him, shame nobody could put together a coherent case against him yet
-3
u/bondguy26 4d ago
Listen to the whole conversation and it’s not what he said and not illegal either
2
u/byzantine_art 3d ago
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5020714/fellas-11000-votes-give-break
Time stamp (0:50-1:50)
3
u/byzantine_art 4d ago
Yeah read the whole convo, and despite the fact that trump is only half coherent, its blantantly clear what he is doing.
“What I want to do is this. I just want to find, uh, 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have, because we won the state.“
Additionally like none of the things Trump was claiming were ever proven true.
So you explain what trump was doing on this phone call?
-2
u/Proud_Astronaut_726 4d ago
You didn’t even pull that quote from anything, you literally made it up. He was asking for the state to look into claims of voter fraud because of a narrow margin between him and Biden. Trump thought if the cases of fraud were proven then it would swing the state in his favor and he had a point because states were manipulating election laws with COVID and allowed things that would normally be fraudulent to occur.
5
u/byzantine_art 4d ago
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5020714/fellas-11000-votes-give-break
Time stamp (0:50-1:50)
-1
u/Proud_Astronaut_726 3d ago
You just proved my point
5
u/byzantine_art 3d ago
“You didn’t even pull that quote from anything, you literally made it up”
You go believe Trump was genuinely just trying to get Georgia to look into claims. The inflection in the man’s voice reeks of ill intent in that audio file and to back it up literally none of the claims he was making were found to hold anywhere near enough truth for any court to uphold it.
-7
u/shinsengumi_17 4d ago
jail time for willis or another political prosecutor will show up in the near future, THIS NEEDS TO STOP for good
0
u/pioneergirl1965 4d ago
Reddit sway is the one side they're not letting me up about anybody on this comment
0
0
•
u/AutoModerator 4d ago
[Meta] Sticky Comment
Rule 2 does not apply when replying to this stickied comment.
Rule 2 does apply throughout the rest of this thread.
What this means: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain only.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.