Nathan Wade, a special prosecutor working with the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office, resigned his post after a judge ruled Friday that District Attorney Fani Willis and her office may remain on the 2020 election case involving former President Donald Trump and his allies if Wade stepped aside.

Wade’s resignation as special prosecutor came hours after Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee laid out two options that would allow for the continued prosecution of the racketeering case against Trump and his co-defendants stemming from an alleged scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Georgia.

-2 points

This case was kind of bonkers. They’re both lawyers, so they knew the ethical risks of an employer banging their employee.

They are leading a case that is super important to the nation, and they put it all at risk. Even if this was innocent, why on earth would do this if you knew the risks better than most?

permalink
report
reply
11 points

for the record the romantic aspect of the relationship ended before Trump was indicted.

It’s still wrong, and it’s still recent enough to justify termination- or it would be for any corporation I’ve ever worked for. It’s unfortunate, but there’s reasons to be hard asses about it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Ehh sorta “She acknowledged the existence of a romantic relationship, but she said that it began in 2022, after Mr. Wade began working for the district attorney’s office, and that the physical element of the relationship ended before the indictment was handed up in August.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I didn’t know that. Thanks for adding that clarification!

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

Probably the best possible outcome. They can always get a new special prosecutor.

permalink
report
reply
25 points

It’s apparently kind of hard to find someone that is willing to put up with the threats against their lives for somewhat measly pay. But, yes, hopefully they can 🤞

permalink
report
parent
reply
-15 points

Well, he wasn’t pulling down measly pay, that was part of the problem. :)

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

I don’t think you understand what people in his position usually make

permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points

Imagine having to resign from your job just for doing you job

permalink
report
reply
3 points

Appearance of impropriety is very much a thing and they’re not a Supreme Court Judge actively taking bribes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

I believe he had to resign for doing his boss.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points
*

They were doing rather more than their job, though.

Is it right? Probably not.

Did they do anything wrong? Almost certainly not.

All of that said, by the time a relationship escalates to the point of your boss knowing intimate details…. The least objectionable thing that will happen is one of you has to go.

It is difficult to imagine a place so out of touch that they would not have a policy explicitly forbidding such a relationship between a boss and anyone they hired.

He was working to clear out her backlog from the prior asshole; while they were dating. I’m not sure what happens when judges and courts are involved; but at the end of the day he was her subordinate; and there is never a way for a boss to date a subordinate without at least the potential for coercion.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Everyone knows that once you date someone, end the relationship, and go your separate ways, it’s impossible to ever have a professional relationship ever again in the future.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

There was a romantic relationship between him and the attorney.

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

Years ago not currently

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

Oh my god, this whole time it’s been conveniently framed as if they’re still hooking up. It’s even more absurd than I thought.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Wade’s resignation as special prosecutor came hours after Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee laid out two options that would allow for the continued prosecution of the racketeering case against Trump and his co-defendants stemming from an alleged scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Georgia.

“This lack of a confirmed financial split creates the possibility and appearance that the district attorney benefited — albeit non-materially — from a contract whose award lay solely within her purview and policing,” McAfee wrote.

McAfee also rebuked Wade for what he said was a “patently unpersuasive explanation for the inaccurate interrogatories” the special prosecutor submitted in divorce proceedings, which the judge said indicated a willingness to “wrongly conceal” his relationship with Willis.

“Reasonable questions about whether the District Attorney and her hand-selected lead SADA testified untruthfully about the timing of their relationship further underpin the finding of an appearance of impropriety and the need to make proportional efforts to cure it,” McAfee wrote.

He also denied Trump’s request to disqualify the district attorney from the prosecution because of “forensic misconduct,” based on a speech Willis gave at Atlanta’s oldest Black church after her relationship with Wade was brought into public view.

While McAfee said the effect of Willis’ speech was to “cast racial aspersions at” Roman’s decision to request she be removed, he could not find that her remarks crossed a line to deny Trump and his co-defendants a fair trial or require her disqualification.


The original article contains 1,864 words, the summary contains 244 words. Saved 87%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

permalink
report
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 14K

    Posts

  • 428K

    Comments