AJC/GPB:What do the proposed Georgia prosecutor oversight bills do? An explainer

[SYFROYH]

Last edited Tue Mar 14, 2023, 11:39 AM - Edit history (2)

ETA: A DUer questions the motives and politics of the analyst of this piece.

The article is a good read. Still there is probably a lot of opportunity for allegations of misconduct to be cover for MAGA politics.

Clarifying prosecutors’ duties
The House version of the proposal would add sections to the state laws outlining duties of a district attorney and solicitor general that explicitly requires them to “review every individual case for which probable cause for prosecution exists, and make a prosecutorial decision available under the law based on the facts and circumstances of each individual case.”

Creating an oversight commission
It would include one five-member panel that investigates allegations made against prosecutors and a three-member panel that would conduct hearings on any charges filed by the investigative panel, issue disciplinary orders, standards and advisory opinions regarding the grounds for disciplining prosecutors.

What would cause a prosecutor to face discipline?
A key difference between the Democratic proposal from three years ago to now is the addition of specific reasons prosecutors could be disciplined or removed from office.

Under the Republican proposals, that includes:

“mental or physical incapacity interfering with the performance of his or her duties which is, or is likely to become, permanent,”
willful misconduct in office,
“willful and persistent failure to carry out duties,”
conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude,
“conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice which brings the office into disrepute”
or allowing a staff member to do any of the aforementioned things.

https://www.gpb.org/news/2023/03/10/what-do-the-proposed-georgia-prosecutor-oversight-bills-do-explainer?utm_source=GA+Today+Newsletter&utm_campaign=3adf1d319a-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2022_08_04_04_27_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c2024aa7e2-3adf1d319a-1412945147

[gab13by13]

1. What kind of source is this?

Let me explain what it does in one sentence. This bill destroys Georgia's independent judiciary.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

2. Well I'm certainly going to trust the analysis of an internet rando

Over the newspaper of record actually covering the story.

[gab13by13]

3. So why not explain your support?

You obviously disagree with my opinion, or should I say you disagree with me, You haven't given an opinion other than backing some newspaper.

I stand by my statement, that bill will destroy Georgia's independent judiciary and I have seen zero opinions to persuade me otherwise.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

4. Or you could explain why you don't trust reporting on the groubd

[gab13by13]

6. You are backing a Magat who compares this Georgia bill to

other similar Democratic bills. Even discussing this horrible bill gives it credence. This bill destroys separation of powers, destroys an independent judiciary, will be a blueprint for other Magat controlled states to pass.

Why won't you condemn this bill? Amazing, one of the worst bills I have seen in my 75 years.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

8. So you have nothing but namecalling

I was waiting for you to pull the MAGAT line. You've been calling anyone who disagrees with you a Trumper for months now.

[gab13by13]

9. You bet, Stephen Fowler is a Magat,

I don't consider that name calling since the Republican party no longer exists.

You disagree with my opinion on the horrible Georgia bill? Amazing.

I never name call anyone here, I gave my opinion on the issue, you, have not. Are you afraid to agree with my opinion? Why?

I would have no problem agreeing with any specific opinion you have.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

11. Still waiting for proof that a respected NPR reporter is a MAGAT...

I'm sure you have some, why else would you post such a thing? But sharing a link to Twitter doesn't provide proof. Until then, I'll take your assertions and sealioning with as much salt as necessary.

[gab13by13]

5. The Magat who wrote the article is a big time proponent of the Magat bill.

Look at what he writes on twitter;

https://twitter.com/stphnfwlr

[gab13by13]

7. Crickets,

This is not a good thread, but leave it up for all to see.

[SYFROYH]

10. Pardon me, I was working.

The source as you can see was Georgia Public Broadcasting and I usually don't question them.
I pulled it from a link from the AJC.

I don't know Steve Fowler, but I'll leave it up with a note to consider the source.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

12. There is no evidence provided about Fowler's politics

The poster just considers anyone who disagrees with them to be a MAGAT.

[gab13by13]

13. Wow, sounds like a personal attack,

The writer of the link, Fowler, the article in the newspaper, is defending the horrible Georgia anti-separation of powers law. His opinion is a Magat opinion, I really don't care how he is registered to vote, he is pushing a right wing talking point. I quit calling Republicans, conservatives, 40 years ago, the Republican party ended with Trump, I choose to call it the Magat party and I really am not ashamed of doing that, sorry if it offends anyone.

I do not call anyone who disagrees with me a Magat only people who push Magat talking points. I have never called you a Magat and I have disagreed with your opinions many times.

I have no idea whet your opinion is re: the Georgia law.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

15. You have said anyone who supports Garland is a MAGAT

I support Garland, so you think I’m a MAGAT.
That sounds like a personal attack to me.

[gab13by13]

16. Wow, that is over the line.

I suggest a ? after MAGAT.

I already posted that I don't think you are a Magat, did you not read my post? You are digging a big hole.

I support Garland, but he has a record that he can be judged on. Only one man lived and never did wrong. Garland made a fantastic decision to give the Trump investigation to Jack Smith.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

19. It is over the line to call DUers who support Garland MAGATs

Hasn’t stopped you.

[gab13by13]

14. Forget about Fowler,

what was your reason to post this thread? Was it to debate the merits of this terrible law, I hope not. Do you agree with Fowler, I hope not? What is your opinion of the new Georgia law?

When I post a link I make sure to let people know whether I am for or against what I am linking, I have no idea why you posted what you did.

[SYFROYH]

18. I provided it as it might be interesting to readers of the GA group.

I welcomed having someone explain the bills in context.

If you think it is a terrible law, perhaps you can explain why. If it is unconstitutional, is that based on separation of powers? If not why not.

[gab13by13]

17. My last post,

the new Georgia law is unconstitutional and we should not give that horrible law any credence by debating it. Hopefully our Supreme Court will find it unconstitutional.