raumdeuter:


What was the reason why UK needed ID to vote and Democrats are suspicious of it

Do me a favour. Spend some time educating yourself instead of asking me to do the research to educate you. The world would be slightly less worse off if you are more informed than you currently seem to be.

Start with the fact that Democrats are not suspicious of the introduction of ID to vote in UK.

raumdeuter:


That's the way to be a leftist..

Send men to women jail
Change kids gender without parental consent
Have boys play in girls sport
I saw a video of Ted Cruz asking a Democrat lady why the need for girls sport then if anyone can play it

She couldn't answer

Professors in Harvard do believe men can menstruate. Anything that makes sense is now colonial western white Christian male oppression

budaatum:


And I suppose that is why you constantly observe buda meeting "all magas disingenuous complaints" and why they have stopped complaining, right, or would you like to see magas quoting me here?

With respect, your quoted above does not show you get me at all, and is more like the gaslighting I get from the stupid magas here, and just blinds me to the rest of your argument.

Fanni should have known what magas do, and shouldn't have played into their hands as she's done by giving them enough to perceive.

Damn! If she wasn't having an affair with Wade, they'd have lied she was to discredit her, and then it turns out she actually was.

As it is, she's lucky the (shameless maga) judge did not remove her as it is perceived by me at least that he'd have loved to if he could.

😀 Hmmm... Let's see if he will reject taking sense from you. To him the left can do no wrong. I like that you are following the facts on this matter like I mentioned before. The judge was light on Fani

budaatum:


Do me a favour. Spend some time educating yourself instead of asking me to do the research to educate you. The world would be slightly less worse off if you are more informed than you currently seem to be.

Start with the fact that Democrats are not suspicious of the introduction of ID to vote in UK.

The irony in this post is laughable given the quality or lack of in your post

Most times I give you the leeway that you are just trolling as no one can seriously be making such logically deficient post consistently

Democrats suspicious in UK? The world will surely be better if you put more thoughts into your posts

IjeBos:


Justice should be blind. We can't have differing rules for differing people based on how hard they cry/compain. If the standard is the "perception of impropriety", then pass a law that says that. But you can't have conservative justices like Thomas being held to a standard below "actual conflict", while Democratic ones are held to a standard of "perception of impropriety". That breaks the system and it is not blind justice. It affords one group "super rights". And I would understand if the goal of that group was to have an even playing field, but that's not that goal.

Look no further than this forum. Basilco, Benalvino and Slyfoxx report all my posts. I've been banned multiple times for using the word "idiot". Banned for saying "Benalvino thinks he is a white Republican living in FL.". And everytime I'm kinda shocked, given the things that are said here. lol.. (I think even you've used the word idiot. ) Now why was I banned? Because those people repeatedly spam the moderators to get me banned. Does changing my behavior change what they do? No. Because their intent isn't to follow the rules, but to get me banned, so noone will challenge them not following the rules. And how well is this Forum doing?

You have this view that if people just meet all Magas disingenuous complaints they'll stop complaining.. That, if Fani was perfect, Trump wouldn't have found an issue. We've seen Trump for 4 years, when has that happened? Fani, could have been Trump's mother and he would have found a way to say she was biased against him.

The judge was categorical

“It’s clear that disqualification can occur if evidence is produced demonstrating an actual conflict or the appearance of one,” McAfee said, according to HuffPost. “I think it’s possible that the facts alleged by the defendant could result in disqualification. I think an evidentiary hearing must......
John Acevedo, a visiting professor with Emory University, told Atlanta local news organization, 11Alive News. "The key phrase from Judge McAfee was 'the appearance of conflict of interest,'" Acevedo said. "And that's clearly what's on Judge McAfee's mind here; it's the appearance of impropriety, even where there may not be any.

benalvino3:

The judge was light on Fani

I hate to be in agreement with you. And to be honest, I've noticed some level of civility from you towards me (though you still lie to represent me as I'm not), that I'm willing to suspend calling you an si so long as it continues. I likely wouldn't though, since I doubt you can change.

Fanni Willis could very easily have been kicked off this case, and she has significantly weakened her position enough that it wouldn't surprise me if dump is let off.

benalvino3:


These people just hate common sense. You would think everyone in the UK voting should have a passport. Why is Khan worried he will lose reelection because of this?

America.

Things that don't require a photo I.D.:
voting

Things that require a photo I.D.:
alcohol
cigarettes
bank account
applying for welfare
Medicaid
Social Security
unemployment benefits
rent/buy a house
apply for a mortgage
drive/buy/rent a car
get on an airplane
get married
buy a gun
adopt a pet
rent a hotel room
apply for a hunting or fishing license
buy a cellphone
visit a casino
pick up a prescription (or buy restricted over-the-counter medications)
donate blood
apply for a license to hold a demonstration
buy an "M"-rated video game
purchase nail polish at CVS

18

budaatum:


I hate to be in agreement with you. And to be honest, I've noticed some level of civility from you towards me (though you still lie to represent me as I'm not), that I'm willing to suspend calling you an si so long as it continues. I likely wouldn't though, since I doubt you can change.

Fanni Willis could very easily have been kicked off this case, and she has significantly weakened her position enough that it wouldn't surprise me if dump is let off.

Whether she got laid and he got paid, is not really a big issue.
It was imperative that the judge probe further on when the relationship started.
They texted 12000 times in a year before his appointment, about 36 times a day. What were they texting about .
The contents could have revealed the actual status of the affair.
The judge downplayed evidence of witnesses, including one whose condo was the tryst room where Wade had the garage door keys.

I'm more concerned about perjury, which the Judge ignored.
About whether she fired a staffer whose audio call I posted yesterday because she saw funds being diverted by her office.
Whether Fani and Wade deliberately widened the scope of the case to make it last longer earning Wade more income.
Whether she failed to report gifts of over $100 , as Georgia law demands.
Whether there is any money Wade banked to offset the business expenses of paying for their rendezvous after she refunded him in cash ( her campaign leftovers).
And a whole lot more.

She should be deemed a hostile prosecutor with a personal vendetta when the trial starts likely to sabotage defence.

basilico:


Whether she got laid and he got paid, is not really a big issue.
It was imperative that the judge probe further on when the relationship started.
They texted 12000 times in a year before his appointment, about 36 times a day. What were they texting about .
The contents could have revealed the actual status of the affair.
The judge downplayed evidence of witnesses, including one whose condo was the tryst room where Wade had the garage door keys.

I'm more concerned about perjury, which the Judge ignored.
About whether she fired a staffer whose audio call I posted yesterday because she saw funds being diverted by her office.
Whether Fani and Wade deliberately widened the scope of the case to make it last longer earning Wade more income.
Whether she failed to report gifts of over $100 , as Georgia law demands.
Whether there is any money Wade banked to offset the business expenses of paying for their rendezvous after she refunded him in cash ( her campaign leftovers).
And a whole lot more.

She should be deemed a hostile prosecutor with a personal vendetta when the trial starts likely to sabotage defence.

He addressed this but I was not convinced. what he said made sense to an extent but why stop there?

Judge Mcfee ruled that other bodies should determine any further cause of action. He didn't want to go there
Death threats from Trump supporters really?
He must've been afraid of threats from being the White guy who went against a black woman.

budaatum:


And I suppose that is why you constantly observe buda meeting "all magas disingenuous complaints" and why they have stopped complaining, right, or would you like to see magas quoting me here?

With respect, your quoted above does not show you get me at all, and is more like the gaslighting I get from the stupid magas here, and just blinds me to the rest of your argument.

Fanni should have known what magas do, and shouldn't have played into their hands as she's done by giving them enough to perceive.

Damn! If she wasn't having an affair with Wade, they'd have lied she was to discredit her, and then it turns out she actually was.

As it is, she's lucky the (shameless maga) judge did not remove her as it is perceived by me at least that he'd have loved to if he could.

You are basically Victim shaming. Arguing that someone should change what is not illegal because someone would falsely say it is illegal. And playing into the hands of those falsely saying it is illegal as if some level of perfection will stop them from doing it.

It's like stockholm syndrome domestic abuse victims have. They believe that they deserve the abuse and if they tried to be more perfect they wouldn't get abused. But no matter what they do, they will get abused because it isn't about them it's about the abuser needing to be in control and have power.

Let me ask you again. What is the conflict of interest or prejudice to the defense, actual or apparent. Explain to me how Willis dating Wade could cause a defendant to get an unfair trial.

benalvino3:


He addressed this but I was not convinced. what he said made sense to an extent but why stop there?

I think those texts have very damning details.

basilico:


The judge was categorical

“It’s clear that disqualification can occur if evidence is produced demonstrating an actual conflict or the appearance of one,” McAfee said, according to HuffPost. “I think it’s possible that the facts alleged by the defendant could result in disqualification. I think an evidentiary hearing must......
John Acevedo, a visiting professor with Emory University, told Atlanta local news organization, 11Alive News. "The key phrase from Judge McAfee was 'the appearance of conflict of interest,'" Acevedo said. "And that's clearly what's on Judge McAfee's mind here; it's the appearance of impropriety, even where there may not be any.

Does this post even make sense. You don't need to respond to me. You're an idiot. And because you're an idiot your post holds 0 value to me. I'm trying to understand the case law/precedent he built his ruling on and you are here quoting me his words as if I hadn't read them and already processed them. The only person who addressed that is DahiLife
It's like you saying 1+1=2 while I'm talking about the pythagorean theorem.

If you want to be on the page I am, give me your view of why his ruling was correct based on those precedents and the law. Judges get shit wrong that's why rulings are often appealed. You're at the basic level of reading/understanding the ruling. Clap for yourself.

Your oft to stupid to understand how little you know. Case in point.

IjeBos:


You are basically Victim shaming. Arguing that someone should change what is not illegal because someone would falsely say it is illegal. And playing into the hands of those falsely saying it is illegal as if some level of perfection will stop them from doing it.

It's like stockholm syndrome domestic abuse victims have. They believe that they deserve the abuse and if they tried to be more perfect they wouldn't get abused. But no matter what they do, they will get abused because it isn't about them it's about the abuser needing to be in control and have power.

Ignoramus.
Buda tried.
ChatGPT gave me just one word for this.

budaatum:


I hate to be in agreement with you. And to be honest, I've noticed some level of civility from you towards me (though you still lie to represent me as I'm not), that I'm willing to suspend calling you an si so long as it continues. I likely wouldn't though, since I doubt you can change.

Fanni Willis could very easily have been kicked off this case, and she has significantly weakened her position enough that it wouldn't surprise me if dump is let off.

He can be a degenerate on this forum day in and day out but as long as he treats you civilily it's all good?
You can't see how that makes you his enabler?

You have a very questionable belief system.

IjeBos:


He can be a degenerate on this forum day in and day out but as long as he treats you civilily it's all good?
You can't see how that makes you his enabler?

You have a very questionable belief system.

You seem to have taken issue with Budaatum because he wants peace. Because you reside in a Latin school in Boston, ypu want to impose your perspectives and directives regarding how others should live and behave within this forum.

This is like the stay-at-home order by IPOB

IjeBos:


He can be a degenerate on this forum day in and day out but as long as he treats you civilily it's all good?
You can't see how that makes you his enabler?

You have a very questionable belief system.

Of course he can be a degenerate or whatever on this forum and in real life day in and day out so long as he is not a degenerate towards me! After all, like everyone here, I reap what I sow, and even I might deserve his degeneration sometimes, though I try hard not to degenerate myself. Besides, it's not as if I can stop him being a degenerate since I don't pay for his data.

We after all can disagree without him lying and constantly misrepresenting one's views (for which I can easily forgive him for considering how complex my views can be), but if he doesn't, he knows what I'd call him in return when I'm not completely ignoring him. Thankfully, readers have eyes of their own, and can choose to trust his lies or not and decide for themselves if it is I who enables him or you.

As for my supposed "questionable belief system", trust me when I say I present my views here to be questioned and challenged, and if I didn't want to be questioned, I'd keep my opinion to myself.

IjeBos:

Let me ask you again. What is the conflict of interest or prejudice to the defense, actual or apparent. Explain to me how Willis dating Wade could cause a defendant to get an unfair trial.

Willis dating Wade could cause dump to claim an unfair trial. And he just might find a maga judge who agrees with him. And since I want the orange dump to rot in jail, I'd rather have a squeaky clean district attorney trying him, which dump can falsely claim Fanni isn't, than one dump can claim has a conflicting interest even if she hasn't got one.

IjeBos:


Does this post even make sense. You don't need to respond to me. You're an idiot. And because you're an idiot your post holds 0 value to me. I'm trying to understand the case law/precedent he built his ruling on and you are here quoting me his words as if I hadn't read them and already processed them. The only person who addressed that is DahiLife
It's like you saying 1+1=2 while I'm talking about the pythagorean theorem.

If you want to be on the page I am, give me your view of why his ruling was correct based on those precedents and the law. Judges get shit wrong that's why rulings are often appealed. You're at the basic level of reading/understanding the ruling. Clap for yourself.

Your oft to stupid to understand how little you know. Case in point.

The judge would DQ her if he saw any appearance of impropriety.
His words.
I listed what I think is improper that he should have demanded more evidence. Misuse of funds, declaration of gifts above $100, etc.
I know you may have read his opinion, but you lack the capacity to understand any contrary point of view.

IjeBos:


....give me your view of why his ruling was correct based on .....

The judges ruling was a maga ruling as far as I am concerned, especially the part where he suggested further action be taken against Willis, and that I am not surprised at. What grieves me is Willis playing into maga hands and compromising her own case for a fuq and a few holidays.

I can't help wonder how this would have played if Fanni were the man and Wade the woman, by the way, and wouldn't be surprised if I were here calling man Fanni a pig.

basilico:


The judge would DQ her if he saw any appearance of impropriety.
His words.
I listed what I think is improper that he should have demanded more evidence. Misuse of funds, declaration of gifts above $100, etc.
I know you may have read his opinion, but you lack the capacity to understand any contrary point of view.

You posts are basically gibberish or baby talk. You barely comprehend the issue and the law and so just fill this place with nonsense. Still here talking about the judge should have asked for evidence of misuse of funds and declaration of gifts without even understanding that all that had no relevance on what the judge had to decide and in fact was the inappropriate venue for that. But you are forced fed that by whatever right wing propaganda you are allowed to be fed into your brain.

In your mind you are the smartest person in the world. But you are just as delusional as your posts.
Keep writing nonsense and being the most technologically illiterate supposed technology person there is.

budaatum:


Willis dating Wade could cause dump to claim an unfair trial. And he just might find a maga judge who agrees with him. And since I want the orange dump to rot in jail, I'd rather have a squeaky clean district attorney trying him, which dump can falsely claim Fanni isn't, than one dump can claim has a conflicting interest even if she hasn't got one.

I don't think there is any serious conflict.
She hired her boyfriend.She paid him a rate higher than what other counties within Georgia pay, higher at first than the experienced RICO attorneys in the team.Thats enough motivation for him to prove his mettle. They spend his windfall together, she refunds him in cash. She diverts cash from other projects to pay her boyfriend and the other attorneys she hired.
Yes. No conflict at all. No appearance of impropriety. Clean deal, above the board.

IjeBos:


You posts are basically gibberish or baby talk. You barely comprehend the issue and the law and so just fill this place with nonsense. Still here talking about the judge should have asked for evidence of misuse of funds and declaration of gifts without even understanding that all that had no relevance on what the judge had to decide and in fact was the inappropriate venue for that. But you are forced fed that by whatever right wing propaganda you are allowed to be fed into your brain.

In your mind you are the smartest person in the world. But you are just as delusional as your posts.
Keep writing nonsense and being the most technologically illiterate supposed technology person there is.

What is that Judge"s job?

Judge McAfee, is tasked with “establishing, maintaining, and enforcing high standards of conduct, and shall personally observe such standards of conduct so that the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary may be preserved.”


What does that involve? Idiot.

budaatum:


Willis dating Wade could cause dump to claim an unfair trial. And he just might find a maga judge who agrees with him. And since I want the orange dump to rot in jail, I'd rather have a squeaky clean district attorney trying him, which dump can falsely claim Fanni isn't, than one dump can claim has a conflicting interest even if she hasn't got one.

You didn't answer my question because I assume you'll fallen into the trap of repeating conservative propaganda and can't actually articulate any harm/prejudice to the defense by two prosecutors dating. You argument is that because someone says something will disadvantage the defense and they may claim an unfair trial without any evidence of it, we should bend over to alleviate that perception? If they claim her blackness is unfair to them and the defense won't get a fair trial because of that, how would you rectify that? Would you want her off the case because of her blackness? I'm comparing the two because neither have any relevance to whether a defendant gets a fair time.

That is wholly silly and not how the law works or should work.

basilico:


I don't think there is any serious conflict.
She hired her boyfriend.She paid him a rate higher than what other counties within Georgia pay, higher at first than the experienced RICO attorneys in the team.

I haven't heard this to be true, so if you have any evidence not from your usual maga mules sources do provide it.

If it's found to be true without justifiable reason, I'd be here claiming she herself should be thrown off the case!

budaatum:


I haven't heard this to be true, so if you have any evidence not from your usual maga mules sources do provide it.

If it's found to be true without justifiable reason, I'd be here claiming she herself should be thrown off the case!

There are 3 Special prosecutors in the team. Wade initial contract was $250 an hour. The other guy RICO expert came in later at $200 , then raised to $250 after 3 months. The lady came in at $150 but later raised to $250.

Fani had also hired Bradley, Wade divorce lawyer on another matter within Fulton at some tidy rate.

P

IjeBos:

You argument is that because someone says something will disadvantage the defense and they may claim an unfair trial without any evidence of it, we should bend over to alleviate that perception?

Oh how glad I would have been if it had been that a claim of impropriety had been made against Fanni and the evidence did not somewhat support it. Unfortunately and sadly, Fanni herself has provided enough evidence for maga conspiracists to get a maga judge to bend over to alleviate that perception as we can all see from the judgement passed down.

As it is, I can see dump eventually getting off on a technicality, and I will blame Fanni if that turns out to be the case, since she ought to know how dirty dump can be in defending his lies and insurrecting.

budaatum:


Of course he can be a degenerate or whatever on this forum and in real life day in and day out so long as he is not a degenerate towards me! After all, like everyone here, I reap what I sow, and even I might deserve his degeneration sometimes, though I try hard not to degenerate myself. Besides, it's not as if I can stop him being a degenerate since I don't pay for his data.

We after all can disagree without him lying and constantly misrepresenting one's views (for which I can easily forgive him for considering how complex my views can be), but if he doesn't, he knows what I'd call him in return when I'm not completely ignoring him. Thankfully, readers have eyes of their own, and can choose to trust his lies or not and decide for themselves if it is I who enables him or you.

As for my supposed "questionable belief system", trust me when I say I present my views here to be questioned and challenged, and if I didn't want to be questioned, I'd keep my opinion to myself.

Why do you think you or anyone deserves his level of abuse? Did you think you deserved to have your picture plastered here and to have been made fun of in a very personal way?

So because you can't stop him, you enable him? So, if someone walks around the street murdering people, you know it yet are unable to stop him, would you sit around having pleasant conversations until he murders the next person? Or do you not think his level of degeneracy doesn't reach the level that causes you concern?

basilico:


There are 3 Special prosecutors in the team. Wade initial contract was $250 an hour. The other guy RICO expert came in later at $200 , then raised to $250 after 3 months. The lady came in at $150 but later raised to $250.

Fani had also hired Bradley Wade divorce lawyer on another matter within Fulton at some tidy rate.

So, basically, you lied as you usually do.

budaatum:


Oh how glad I would have been if it had been that a claim of impropriety had been made against Fanni and the evidence did not somewhat support it. Unfortunately and sadly, Fanni herself has provided enough evidence for maga conspiracists to get a maga judge to bend over to alleviate that perception as we can all see from the judgement passed down.

As it is, I can see dump eventually getting off on a technicality, and I will blame Fanni if that turns out to be the case, since she ought to know how dirty dump can be in defending his lies and insurrecting.

I meant Evidence that there is prejudice to the defense.

It's simple, this is the test he should have used.

Does the supposed conduct prejudice the defense in any capacity?
If no, conduct is not relevant.

You're dancing around this and I don't know why.

IjeBos:


Why do you think you or anyone deserves his level of abuse? Did you think you deserved to have your picture plastered here and to have been made fun of in a very personal way?

So because you can't stop him, you enable him? So, if someone walks around the street murdering people, you know it yet are unable to stop him, would you sit around having pleasant conversations until he murders the next person? Or do you not think his level of degeneracy doesn't reach the level that causes you concern?

Go cry to mods... For the record, I have never reported you.
Why report a fool with nothing between his ears. My not reporting you gives you more rope to hang yourself

budaatum:


So, basically, you lied as you usually do.

You are very funny. Wade never went below $250 like the other two.
I assume once the other guy started teaching the divorce lawyer about RICO, Fani had to up his wages.

Bradley left Wade lawfirm over a sexual harrassment case. Were it s criminal thing, Fani would be the one to investigate him.