THE local paper in Atlanta, The Atlanta Journal Constitution (AJC), published a pair of stories that — at least for this Kossack — were heartening. Local Dem pols in Fulton County, who were previously thinking (like so many MSNBC and Slate pundits) “oh no, Fani screwed up and deserves to be punished” are changing their tune. In one, the AJC writes:
Atlanta Mayor Andre Dickens bounded into the Fulton County Courthouse on Friday and took a conspicuous seat in the second row of the cramped courtroom, on the same row where a handful of other prominent Democrats were already stationed.
To his right sat former Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin. Charlie Bailey, the party’s 2022 nominee for lieutenant governor, was a few seats over. And former Gov. Roy Barnes, the state’s last Democratic chief executive, was about to testify at the behest of District Attorney Fani Willis.
And, in another piece AJC life columnist Nedra Rhone penned a column entitled “The aim isn’t just to disqualify Willis. It’s to discredit her.” Rhone writes:
Before testimony in the evidentiary hearing began, all I could think was that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis should have known better.
She had potentially muddled the biggest case of her career — election interference allegations involving former President Donald Trump and his allies — by either forming, or already having, a romantic relationship with Nathan Wade, the special prosecutor she appointed.
Rhone goes on to write that she changed her mind after seeing the slough of mostly angry white men (and one woman) essentially attack Willis for daring to be a DA while being black.
This development today is heartening to me. Judge McAffee was appointed by Kemp to fill a vacant seat but needs to run for re-election in Fulton County if he wants to keep his seat. He is not going to be able to do this if, after creating the evidentiary hearing/show trial that effectively put Fani Willis on trial rather than Trump, he makes up new law to disqualify Fani Willis from prosecuting Trump, et al (to delay or kill the case). He might not care about getting re-elected — maybe he’s looking to Trump for his payday — but if he does care it’ll ensure he doesn’t bend the law in his ruling which I hope means that Willis can continue as there is no indication that the “Defense” (Trump’s and the other defendants attorneys) proved conflict of interest and that Fani Willis only started this trial so she could get free trips to Belize, Aruba and Napa from her boyfriend. It doesn’t matter if they created some questions about the timeline — that is not what the Judge is considering.
I know many commentators were shocked by how aggressive Willis was on the stand. This take was problematic on many levels (not the least being a very questionable way to portray a prominent black female DA’s defense of her actions). But, what these also commentators also missed was that Fani Willis was playing the political and legal angle and it worked. She shored up her local political suppport. No wonder — black and other people clearly saw the race baiting going on with this hearing (e.g, Trump’s lawyer asking Fani about “scurrying to the ATM to get cash” evoking images of rats and mice).
Finally, i want to respectfully comment on some Kossacks concern that Fani be able to continue on the case when it’s clear “she lied.” One, it’s not clear — at all — that lied. She’s been accused by the “defense” (Trump’s lawyer) but nothing has been proven. The defense brought one — very not credible witness (Robin Yeartie) — who made this claim (and tried to imply that Bradley would say the same which he has not done on the record). Her accusers, remember, are not exactly Boy Scouts. Second, this “lying” about the timeline is not necessarily germane to the Judge’s decision here. It doesn’t — even if proved and it has not been — disqualify her from the case. The defense is bringing up the “lying” to undermine Willis publicly (it is not clear how this helps them win and disqualify her in this instance). So, if making that claim, please specify how the lying will be proven and how that will end up causing to the judge to disqualify her (as I would like to understand). Third, think about the context of this case (and do some research on the charges she is bringing). The “lies” and “fraud” she is trying to prosecute are mind boggling. Yes, Fani Willis — like all of us — is not perfect but she is many miles away from being anywhere near the complete scum she is prosecuting. And, if you rate Michael Isikoff’s opinion (see his new book) she is actually a pretty amazing person and DA. I, for one, want her to be able to prosecute this case.