Imagine having to resign from your job just for doing you job
this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2024
175 points (99.4% liked)
politics
19234 readers
2977 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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.
- 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
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.
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.
Appearance of impropriety is very much a thing and they're not a Supreme Court Judge actively taking bribes.
I believe he had to resign for doing his boss.
There was a romantic relationship between him and the attorney.
Years ago not currently
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.
Probably the best possible outcome. They can always get a new special prosecutor.
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 🤞
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!
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?
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.
I didn’t know that. Thanks for adding that clarification!
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."