Fani Willis made one demand before the Supreme Court that you won’t believe
Democrat prosecutors are still coming after Donald Trump.
These lawfare partisans don’t know when to give up.
And Fani Willis made one demand before the Supreme Court that you won’t believe.
Fani Willis just can’t let go of her crusade to try and jail Donald Trump.
The Georgia Court of Appeals handed down a ruling disqualifying Willis from the RICO case she brought against Donald Trump.
In the ruling, the majority wrote that Willis’ affair with Nathan Wade and then subsequent decision to hire Wade as special prosecutor in the Trump case created an appearance of impropriety that was impossible to overcome.
Willis appealed to the Georgia State Supreme Court and demanded it reinstate her on the case.
In her motion, Willis claimed removing her from Trump prosecution was an attack on the idea of a criminal justice system itself.
“The majority opinion ignored precedent, created uncertainty that is likely to recur, implemented a hair-trigger standard disfavored under Georgia law, and replaced the trial court’s discretion with its own,” Willis declared.
Willis baselessly argued no prosecutor could meet the standard the court laid out.
“The State submits that review is necessary to reverse the majority opinion and clarify the standard for disqualification,” Willis added.
Willis claimed the court of appeals disqualified her “based solely upon an appearance of impropriety and absent a finding of an actual conflict of interest or forensic misconduct.”
Willis claimed this ruling was unprecedented.
“No Georgia court has ever disqualified a district attorney for the mere appearance of impropriety without the existence of an actual conflict of interest,” Willis added.
“And no Georgia court has ever reversed a trial court’s order declining to disqualify a prosecutor based solely on an appearance of impropriety,” Willis continued.
Of course what was unprecedented was Willis indicting Donald Trump and 18 of his lawyers, supporters, and campaign aides for the “crime” of contesting an election as Republicans.
Willis also claimed her affair “had not actually affected the case in any way,” adding that disqualifying her “divest[ed] her of her constitutional authority to investigate and prosecute crimes.”
But the argument the appeals court understandably accepted was the fact that Willis brought her lover onto this case despite Wade having no experience prosecuting felonies.
Willis then let the investigation drag on for two-and-a-half years, during which the man she carried on an affair with raked in $654,000 in taxpayer money, some of which Wade used to pay for he and Willis to go on vacation.
The clear impression the court worried would take root is the idea that Willis ran a sprawling investigation against the former President of the United States as a financial windfall for her and her paramour.
