Pamela Lang, a journalist and graduate student in Arizona, wrote for The Hechinger Report about her futile search for a school that would enroll her son, who has special needs. Despite Arizona’s budget-busting voucher program, she and he were turned away again and again. It’s time for her to check out her local public school, where her son would get the services he needs and he could not be rejected.
Please read her account.
If you live in Arizona, school choice may be coming to your neighborhood soon. As someone who has had more school choice than I know what to do with, I can tell you what may feel like a shocking surprise: Private schools have the power to choose, not parents.
I live in Phoenix, where the nearby town of Paradise Valley is getting ready to offer the privatization movement’s brand of choice to families. The district has indicated that it will likely vote to close four public schools due to insufficient funds. If this happens, other districts will probably follow: The state’s recent universal voucher expansion has predictably accelerated the diversion of money from public to private schools.
Arizona approved use of school choice vouchers, called Empowerment Scholarship Accounts, or ESAs, in 2011 on the promise that they were strictly for children with special needs who were not being adequately served in the public school system. The amount of funds awarded to qualified students was based on a tiered system, according to type of disability.
Over the years, the state incrementally made more students eligible, until full expansion was finally achieved in 2022. For some students, the amount of voucher money they qualify for is only a few thousand dollars, nowhere near enough to cover tuition at a private school. Often, their parents can’t afford to supplement the balance. However, my son, who is autistic, qualified for enough to cover full tuition.
I took him out of public school in 4th grade. Every school I applied to seemed to have the capability to accommodate his intellectual disability needs but lacked the willingness. Eventually, I found a special education school willing to accept him. It was over an hour from our home, but I hoped for the best. Unfortunately, it ultimately was not a good fit.
I then thought Catholic schools would welcome my son, but none of them did. One Catholic school principal who did admit him quickly rescinded the offer after a teacher objected to having him in her class.
The long list of general, special-ed, Catholic and charter schools that turned my son away indicate how little choice actually exists, despite the marketing of ESA proponents.
There was a two-year period where I gave up and he was home without social opportunities. I was not able to homeschool, so a reading tutor and his iPad became his only access to education.
I then tried to enroll him in private schools for students with disabilities.
These schools were almost always located in former office suites in strip malls with no outdoor access. My son’s current school shares space with a dialysis center in a medical building, while a former school was located in a small second-floor suite in a Target plaza.
Once a private school admits your child, they can rescind admission without cause. Private schools are at leisure to act as virtual dictatorships, and special-ed schools in particular are notorious for keeping parents at a distance…
Education is a human right, and public schools, open to all, are the guardians of this right. What privatizers call choice does not really exist.
Please open the link and read the article in full.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Special Ed students loose on two fronts in this case. Public schools struggle to provide adequate resources for students with special needs because the choice movement is taking their money. Add to that the reality that Federal Funding that should alleviate this shortfall has not kept up with inflation and decreased in percentage of overall funding. I saw all of this as an educator and parent with a special needs child. None of this is good.
LikeLike
So-called choice is no panacea for education. Private companies can discriminate, dismiss and fail to provide services while students lose their civil rights protections. Parents will be in for a bigger shock when they realize there is little real value in certain choices. At the end of the universal voucher scheme, states will likely try to pass the responsibility and cost for children’s education back to parents in keeping with libertarian beliefs. The rich will be better off financially, but everyone else will pay the price for such reckless, short-sighted policy. They will long for the time when public schools served all students to the best of their ability. Public education, a pillar of democracy, has been taken for granted for too long.
LikeLike
Unfortunately, once the public school system has been partially dismantled, it will be much more expensive to build it back to where it was before vouchers came along. That is, if it ever gets there.
LikeLike
Sorry to hijack, but the ever expanding drama of the Fulton County DA disqualification motion has taken yet another turn:
https://www.ajc.com/politics/breaking-cellphone-data-raise-questions-about-start-of-willis-wade-relationship/SFVMYPTD2RD3HMZYOH3377CNNE/
LikeLike
Amazing the lengths that Trump’s defense team is going to to knock out the prosecutor.
No such thing as private life any more.
LikeLike
At this point I imagine they want to show she perjured herself as much as they want to show the relationship/financial benefit they’ve alleged for disqualification.
It’s easy to get carried away with things before you hear from the other side, so we’ll have to wait and see what the DA’s office says about this. And then we’ll have to see whether the judge allows this into evidence.
LikeLike
It’s clear that Willis and Wade had a romantic relationship. They said so. I don’t think the Trump team proved either a conflict of interest or financial benefit.
Perjury is another matter.
Even there, the charges depend on knowing stuff that only Wade and Willis know. When he stayed at her place until the wee hours or even overnight, were they singing, dancing, praying—or, making whoopee (fornicating)? Only they know.
LikeLike
It is pretty much impossible to “perjure” yourself as to when a “romantic” relationship began.
The only people who can testify when a friendship becomes romantic are the couple themselves.
And the credit cards travel records so far reflect that they saw themselves as a romantic couple and traveled together during the time they testified to.
They traveled together only during the time they were a romantic couple. During the time they were just close friends, they did not. Who cares if they were close friends with benefits or not?
Both of them already testified they spoke on the phone and that Wade visited Willis.
There is undisputed testimony ALREADY that Fani asked other attorneys to take on the job BEFORE she asked Wade. She got turned down by the others.
That fact alone should have made the Republican judge sanction the defense attorneys – we know for a fact that the defense attorney offered false information in the legal filing, and we know for a fact that the same defense attorney was cajoling a law partner of Wade’s to break attorney client privilege, and conspiring with Wade’s wife’s divorce attorney to get dirt.
No Republican judge would allow this kind of digging into a Republican prosecutor’s personal life to help Democrat defendants discredit Republican prosecutor.
Even if that Republican prosecutor had traveled to Italy and had lavish meals with someone they are DEFINITELY not supposed to be influenced by.
Frankly, the affadavit that Wade was NOT Fani’s first choice for the job should have ended this.
The false information in the defense filing should have ended this.
But the Republican judge is demonstrating that he is trying to help powerful Republican defendants and has taken some very improper actions to help them.
If anyone has a conflict of interest, it is the judge.
Compare his actions to the Georgia State Election Board when they received a legal filing with false accusations. They asked for evidence.
Phone records between two prosecutors on the same team who are allowed to be close friends or even close friends with benefits or a romantic couple are NOT evidence of any conflict of interest. Period. It’s a theory that I assume flerp! would reject out of hand if it was the phone records between William Barr and the supposedly “independent” prosecutor John Durham.
That’s a fact. The Republican judge just wants to create noise to protect the powerful Republican defendants.
The person who needs to be removed is the judge.
The judge knew from the first that Fani Wade tried to get other attorneys to join the prosecution and got turned down. And then she asked Wade who did an excellent job and whose job performance has never been questioned.
The rest is noise. The Republican judge embraces the definition of “good faith belief” that a Republican defense attorney gives for providing false information to the court. But the Republican judge rejects Democrat prosecutors Fani and Wade’s definition of when THEY considered themselves a “romantic couple” instead of close friends (possibly with benefits). Despite that timing being IRRELEVANT to the conflict of interest question.
And the Republican judge does this to protect the interests of influential Republican defendants.
LikeLike
Diane,
If Willis and Wade had not conducted this prosecution with the utmost professionalism and been so successful at getting guilty pleas from Republican defendants who are poised to testify against Trump and the other more powerful Republican defendants, their personal life would not have been targeted.
The real conflict of interest here is with a Republican judge who has acted improperly in response to a Republican defense attorney who made a legal filing that included false information to smear the Democrat prosecutor.
I don’t know if the Republican judge has an actual conflict of interest or if that Republican judge just APPEARS to have a conflict of interest. But the Republican judge needed to conduct himself with the utmost integrity, and instead he has spurned ethical practice and bent over backward to give the Republican defense attorneys the UNPRECEDENTED – and absolutely gratuitous – opportunity to publicly smear the Democrat prosecutors, while the Republican judge condoned the falsehoods in Republican defense attorneys’ legal filings.
LikeLike
The judge has not yet ruled. Let’s see what he says.
Personally, I find all this digging into the intimate details of the lives of two prosecutors on the same side to be disgusting.
LikeLike
I know you’re very much focused on the idea that there is an extreme difficulty in defining “romantic relationship,” but there really isn’t, and even if there were, Willis has not taken that legalistic approach. And it is very possible to perjure yourself when testifying about when a romantic relationship began. If, for example, it were somehow established that Willis and Wade were having sex prior to his appointment as special prosecutor, both Willis and Wade would have perjured themselves. All the hemming and hawing in the world about the definition of “romantic relationship” wouldn’t change the judge’s view about that.
I just hope Willis is not so incredibly stupid to have actually perjured herself.
LikeLike
Diane, in reality, the Republican judge has already ruled.
The Republican judge ruled that he would disqualify the Democrat prosecutor if the Republican defense attorneys could make it APPEAR that she had a conflict of interest.
And then the Republican judge called for a public, televised hearing where multiple Republican defense attorneys could ask the Democrat prosecutor loaded questions that included false innuendo and make her “appear” to be guilty of something or other. Maybe perjury.
The hearing itself created the APPEARANCE of wrongdoing that the judge said would guide his ruling. There was no other purpose to that public hearing except to create an “appearance” issue to give cover to the ruling the Republican judge planned to make. It certainly was not about finding credible evidence of ACTUAL conflict of interest, since legal scholars have pointed out that even if everything alleged in the defense filing was true (and it wasn’t), there is still no actual conflict of interest.
That’s why the Republican judge should be disqualified. From the start he said all the Republican defense attorneys had to do for him to remove Fani Willis to make it APPEAR she did something wrong.
And then the Republican judge held a televised hearing to give all of the Republican defense attorneys ample opportunity to do just that. Even flerp! posted here that he watched the hearings and it was reasonable for someone to believe that Fani APPEARED to commit perjury.
The entire public hearing didn’t even attempt to find evidence of an ACTUAL conflict of interest. Prosecutors hook up with other prosecutors all the time and I don’t think there has been any time in the last 40 years that a judge has allowed defense attorneys to cross examine 2 prosecutors about their romantic life — especially a romantic relationship that was temporary and had already ended many months earlier. Because a personal relationship by two prosecutors on the same case doesn’t harm the defense.
The judge already knew Fani asked other attorneys first to do this job first, and they turned down this job. That’s all he needed to dismiss the cockamamie evidence-free theories that Fani hired her lover Willis so he could reward her with free vacations (which still doesn’t harm the defense) and she wanted the trial to go on indefinitely so she could have more vacations (which is easily shown to be false because the romantic relationship and supposedly “free travel” had been over 7 months ago, and the trial was still going on and being conducted in the same professional manner.)
The judge already knew there was no actual conflict of interest. He wanted to disqualify Fani, needed to get the public to accept that he had grounds to diqualify as long as Fani “appeared” to possibly, maybe done something wrong, and I find it shocking that he will get away with completely unethical behavior when he disqualifies Fani.
If I am wrong, I will be glad to hear “I told you so”, but there is no doubt whatsoever that the Republican judge is compromised and plans to disqualify Fani.
The most prominent defendants – including Trump – are in HUGE trouble because Fani got Republican defendants to plead guilty and agree to testify against them.
THAT is why the Republican judge will disqualify her. The “appearance” reasons that the Republican judge himself helped create that have been legitimized by the media is why the Republican judge will get away with it.
People wonder why Fani would have a relationship with another prosecutor, but the reason is because there is actually nothing wrong with two prosecutors hooking up. There really isn’t. I have no idea how the right wing has managed to create a narrative that this isn’t allowed.
LikeLike
flerp!,
What does “having sex” mean to you? If two people kiss, are they “having sex”?
Do you assume that two people who spend the night in the same apartment are having sex? What if they are both of the same gender? Do you assume that they are having sex?
In Fatal Attraction, was Glenn Close correct that she and Michael Douglas had a real “romantic relationship” because they hooked up? Was Michael Douglas committing perjury if he testified under oath that he did not consider the hook up to be a “romantic relationship”?
flerp!, I am not telling you anything your kids haven’t explained to you. A hook up isn’t a “romantic relationship”. You are the one trying to re-define words.
All the forensic evidence that Willis and Wade were a romantic couple and not just close friends supports their story. And yet you have re-defined a romantic relationship to mean something no one else thinks it means.
If Republican defense attorney Ashleigh Merchant makes a sworn statement that Wade and Willis lived together as a romantic couple, and it turns out that Ashleigh Merchant had presented false evidence to smear both of them, why isn’t Ashleigh Merchant lying when she claims she had a good faith reason to believe a rumor and put it in a legal filing despite even though “I heard a rumor” is NOT a good faith reason to believe something is true?
And yet you keep telling me that Ashleigh Merchant told the truth. Because to YOU, the definition of “good faith belief” includes just hearing a rumor.
Do you really not see your double standard? You keep re-defining words to mean whatever supports Republican narratives.
LikeLike
If there is an evidentiary hearing that turns on the question of when a romantic relationship formed between two people, and the two people testify under oath that there was no romantic relationship until date X, and that there was no sexual intercourse before date x, and that neither of them ever spent the night with the other until date x, and then there is credible evidence that they in fact did have sexual intercourse before date x, and were observed holding hands and kissing and otherwise being physically affectionate prior to date x, then I as the finder of fact will find that these two people committed perjury. Not that complicated.
LikeLike
Also you’re again mischaracterizing what I’ve said previously. I didn’t tell you that Merchant’s disqualification motion was “telling the truth.” I told you that there was no basis to say she was lying, because there was a good faith basis for the allegations. There’s a difference and I took pains to explain it, and I’m not going to go through it all again and again.
Didn’t we just go through a big thing about how you should just state your position without attacking the views of other commenters? Let’s try sticking to that. I know you disagree with me, and that’s fine. Stick to the merits.
LikeLike
flerp! writes:
“and then there is credible evidence that they in fact did have sexual intercourse before date x, and were observed holding hands and kissing and otherwise being physically affectionate prior to date x, then I as the finder of fact will find that these two people committed perjury. ”
How does one get “credible evidence” of sexual intercourse? Video in their homes? Please tell me you don’t see two people (same gender, different genders) hold hands or kiss hello or good bye and you know they are having sex. That’s not evidence.
More CREDIBLE evidence would be that a couple VACATIONS TOGETHER!
But the forensic evidence of when this couple began taking their personal vacations together supports Fani, since there is no evidence at all of any hotels or vacations together BEFORE Fani says they became a romantic couple, and no evidence they took vacations together after they STOPPED being a romantic couple, seven months earlier.
The defense is arguing that Fani and Wade became a romantic couple shortly after they met in 2019, despite the fact there isn’t evidence they even spent much time together in the same room before Ward was hired.
flerp!, two friends who see each other infrequently might hold hands. They might even kiss, especially hello and goodbye. I hope you don’t take that as evidence they had sex.
People even visit one another’s homes without having sex. Ask your kids and they will tell you that does happen.
There is NO actual conflict of interest here, and there would be NO conflict of interest here even if the defense was telling the truth that the two of them had sex shortly after they met in 2019 and had a continuous romantic relationship and the reason Fani is prosecuting these Republicans who committed crimes is because she wanted to be able to hire her lover Wade so he could use that money to take her on vacations. FYI, we already have credible evidence the Republican defense attorneys are the liars.
flerp!, you now seem to want to get Fani Willis on a perjury charge, but you keep arguing that a Republican defense attorney who made false statements in a legal filing was absolutely, positively not lying.
Why the double standard? Especially when you know for a FACT that the Republican defense attorney’s allegation is false (she even admitted it herself!), but you don’t have any credible evidence that Fani said anything false.
LikeLike
Have a great night.
LikeLike
flerp! says:
“I told you that there was no basis to say she was lying, because there was a good faith basis for the allegations.”
The Republican defense attorney heard a rumor. That’s it. You have defined “good faith basis” as including hearing a rumor.
You left that out. I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but can you provide some rational argument for us non-lawyers as to why hearing a vague rumor is a “good faith basis for an allegation.”
And I say that Fani has a good faith basis for believing that she doesn’t have a “romantic relationship” with a good friend she talks to and texts with and sees in person but not that often.
And I say that Fani has a good faith basis for believing that she IS in a romantic relationship with that friend when they start taking their personal vacations together, and his mom even comes along.
That isn’t complicated at all.
Some women would be reluctant to say that they are in a “romantic relationship” with a friend, just because they hooked up once or twice over the course of a couple months.
And they would be reluctant to say that because they are afraid their friend would go running because the friend does NOT consider it a “romantic” relationship just because they hooked up once or twice.
Which one is committing perjury, flerp!?
It should be unacceptable to try to criminalize people’s own perceptions of when “hooking up” infrequently with someone you know becomes a “romantic relationship” which implies a commitment to the relationship.
Especially if the timing of when a friendship turned into a “romantic relationship is entirely irrelevant to whether that couple had a conflict of interest?
Why are you legitimizing what is clearly a politicization of the courts?
LikeLike
NYCPSP,
I don’t think FLERP is politicizing anything. He’s passing along what he knows about the case. The judge has not rendered a decision. Wait for the decision before you decry it.
LikeLike
Can you stop? Can you not control it?
LikeLike
Diane,
Have seen how many times flerp! has alluded to Fani and perjury, not just today but last week, too?
Diane, you, yourself already settled this question far more concisely and clearly than I did:
“It’s clear that Willis and Wade had a romantic relationship. They said so. I don’t think the Trump team proved either a conflict of interest or financial benefit.
Perjury is another matter.
Even there, the charges depend on knowing stuff that only Wade and Willis know. When he stayed at her place until the wee hours or even overnight, were they singing, dancing, praying—or, making whoopee (fornicating)? Only they know.”
I agree with you. Only the couple would know if they committed perjury with regards to whether they had sexual intercourse (versus hugged and kissed hello and goodbye) during the relatively infrequent times they actually met up in person. Only the couple can define their relationship.
So I have no idea why flerp! is picking a fight with me.
I agree with you, Diane.
Willis and Wade ADMIT they had a romantic relationship that ended between 6 – 8 months ago, and they ADMIT that they had a personal friendship before the romantic relationship started. So it’s such desperation that Republicans are falsely stating Fani and Wade “may have” perjured themselves because those Republicans have falsely claimed that the romantic relationship started almost immediately after they met in 2019 and this supposed romantic relationship continued unabated at least through spring of 2022.
Two friends who are not emotionally committed to a romantic relationship are not in a “romantic relationship”. They are the only ones who decide when that commitment happens, and it is highly unlikely that two friends who live in the same city but only manage to meet in person at very infrequent intervals are having a “romantic” relationship. It’s not a coincidence that the forensic evidence supports Fani and Wade, because the forensic evidence showed they started ACTING like a romantic couple only during the time that they testified they WERE a romantic couple! Not before. Not after. DURING.
And we all agree that even if Fani and Wade were having sex 3x/week since 2019, it isn’t a conflict of interest.
So I have no idea why flerp! and I are even arguing since presumably flerp! agrees with your take on it.
It is always possible for this unethical Republican judge to say that Fani “appears” to have possibly committed perjury about her relationship and use that as his excuse to do what he clearly wants to do and remove the successful democrat prosecutor that Trump and his cronies want to be removed.
A Republican judge abusing his power to help influential and powerful Republican defendants remove a successful Democrat prosecutor is what most people should be concerned with.
Very scary times. I am positive the Republican judge will remove Fani because Trump wants her removed, not because two prosecutors hooking up has ever been a conflict of interest to the defense. Or a “perjury” charge about a personal relationship that could never be proved.
We should be outraged.
LikeLike
Wait for the judge’s decision.
LikeLike
Despite the Republican defense attorneys digging deep into cell phone records, they still couldn’t find any records Wade spent an entire night at Fani’s apartment.
Instead they found is Wade stayed late 2 times in 18 months? And texting one another like friends do?
Again, I find it odd that forensic evidence that actually SUPPORTS Fani and Wade’s definition of “romantic couple” is mischaracterized as if it is evidence that Fani committed perjury.
Romantic couple isn’t two friends who (maybe) hook up twice in a year.
Instead of cell phone records that show Wade was at Fani’s home overnight enough times to make it even remotely possible they were a romantic couple, the defense team dug deeply and found Wade was at Fani’s home late only 2 times in a year? (Remember Willis and Wade testified that they did hang out together at Wills’ condo, so this “new” evidence is not really new at all.)
Why does the media immediately use the right wing framing of facts? Why do any of us help legitimize that framing?
Two close friends (possibly) hooking up together late at night only twice in a year and not other times doesn’t constitute a “romantic” relationship. Odd that the defense has dug so deep and came up with no evidence they did the things that a romantic couple does — like take vacations together — except during 2022 and the beginning of 2023. It started when they became a romantic couple and stopped when they stopped being a romantic couple, 7 months BEFORE the Republican defense got a Republican judge to let them help smear Fani based on her personal life, instead of having that Republican judge do if it was Democrats on trial instead of Republican defendants he wanted to help.
LikeLike
I highly recommend a read of this 1/24/24 post by Jay Dratler, Jr, a Daily Kos legal blogger (with impressive legal background). https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/1/24/2219260/-Debunking-the-Media-Hit-Job-on-Prosecutors-Fani-Willis-and-Nathan-Wade He shows the practical absurdity of the attempted disqualification of Willis & Wade.
Dratler’s ire is focused on the media coverage, even accusing WaPo of yellow journalism. My lurking concern is that all this sturm & drang may well delay the outcome of the GA case against Trump until after election day… But MSM should get a punch in the nose for aiding and abetting.
LikeLike
bethree5,
Thanks very much for this link. I tried to see if Dratler, Jr. had written any follow-up since the actual kangaroo court hearings, because this was from back in January, but couldn’t find any.
Here is Dratler:
“The claim that an alleged love affair and joint travel between co-workers on the same side of the same case equals a conflict of interest or fraud would motivate only the most desperate and starving attorney to take that case. Any lawyer with a good practice would turn it down cold.”
…..
In our legal system, what motivates prosecutors (or any other lawyers) doesn’t matter. They could hate the defendant personally, love each other, or just be doing their jobs. What matters is how the jury views the evidence, under the judge’s watchful eye. The judge makes sure the evidence satisfies the rules (also developed over centuries) and is not unduly prejudicial to one party or another.
Defendants’ attempts to bring the prosecutors’ personal motivations into the courtroom is nothing less than a frontal assault on the way our courts work, developed over the 809 years since Magna Carta. No Anglo-American court will or should approve that assault.”
The Republican judge DID approve that assault.
So I do not understand why anyone here would try to legitimize what is clearly a Republican judge’s attempt to help the influential Republican defendants by finding some justification – however suspect – to disqualify the democrat prosecutor who was likely going to get guilty verdicts against them.
The saddest part is that Fani Willis is allowed to have a romantic affair with another prosecutor. It isn’t a conflict of interest. The Republican judge knew that, and this would have been tossed if the defendants had been Democrats and not influential Republicans It is outrageous that the judge would have a public hearing that gives Republican defense attorneys the chance to discredit Fani with innuendo instead of evidence.
I worry that I see too much normalizing of what a biased Republican judge is doing to find grounds to disqualify Fani (“perjury!”) and almost no outrage about this Republican judge gratuitously allowing Republican defense attorneys to publicly pry into a prosecutor’s sex life, especially when articles by legal experts like the one you linked to make it clear that it is actually okay for two prosecutors on the same case to hook up for a while and then stop hooking up.
What’s not okay is a biased Republican judge using a legal filing that includes false information about the sex lives of prosecutors as an excuse to hold a hearing so he can disqualify a democrat prosecutor on “appearances”, just like Trump wants.
LikeLike
The DA’s response.
https://x.com/annabower/status/1761201745923903512?s=46&t=vV_4bJ7GuABaalzetJofQA
LikeLike
FLERP, how did Trump’s investigators get access to Wade’s cell data?
LikeLike
Unclear to me. The affidavit says there was a “records request.” Not sure if it was an actual subpoena. If it was a subpoena, I’m confused about why the state wasn’t given notice. Unless they were and somehow missed it. It’s also odd because ATT turned over the data in like a week, which seems insanely quick. Frankly I’m confused by the whole thing. Note I’ve only browsed the filings on my phone.
LikeLike
Diane — here’s a good Twitter thread that addresses your question.
LikeLike
Sorry, here’s the thread.
https://x.com/annabower/status/1761507249527132593?s=46&t=vV_4bJ7GuABaalzetJofQA
LikeLike
I have seen 20 or 50 articles about how the cell phone data supposedly undercuts Fani and Wade’s testimony and insinuates they likely committed perjury.
Then I saw one CNN story:
” The DA’s office also argued that there is evidence showing Willis and Wade were not in the same place on the dates listed, including “at work at the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office AND VISTING THE THREE CRIME SCENES WHERE A MASS MURDER MOTIVATED BY RACE AND GENDER BIAS HAD TAKEN PLACE.”
It’s definitely starting to look like the Republican defense attorneys need to be sanctioned by the Republican judge for again trying to use false innuendo and lies to “get” a Democratic prosecutor.
But the Republican judge won’t do that. It really is starting to be outrageous.
This DESPERATE attempt to prove an IRRELEVANT “romantic relationship” that supposedly went on continuously since 2019. And it is the DEFENSE stories that keep being proven to be lies. Fani and Wade lived together! They never stopped being romantically involved since 2019. Here’s cell phone data that at least 2 times each month Wade was somewhere in an area full of restaurant and bars — but each time he was hooking up with Fani.
Most Americans likely already “know” that it’s highly likely and practically certain that Fani committed perjury about her relationship, despite it being the Republican defense attorneys who keep lying (or “accidentally” claiming false information is true) so that the prosecutor Trump wants removed is removed by a co-opted Republican judge). The Republican judge can now say Fani meets his requirement of having the “appearance” of doing something wrong.
From the CNN story:
“At the end of its response, the DA’s office questioned whether Trump legally obtained the cell phone data cited in its initial motion, noting that a search warrant is typically required to obtain such information.”
Now THAT definitely calls for the Republican defense attorneys to be put under oath with Fani Willis allowed to question them about how they obtained the information. I sure hope they don’t “appear” to have committed any crime.
LikeLike
It’s not at all clear to me that Willis perjured herself.
LikeLike
“Every day on our way to my son’s special education school, we drive by an elegant, sprawling private school campus. He waves at the children and pretends they’re his friends.”
Damn.
LikeLike
Heart breaker.
LikeLike
Microcosm.
LikeLike