In news that is a surprise to no one on earth, Fani Willis admits …
… to an affair with the prosecutor she appointed in the case against Trump.
Only it’s called a “personal relationship,” which is a nicely generic term:
Embattled Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis admitted to having a “personal relationship” with lead prosecutor Nathan Wade but says this shouldn’t warrant tossing out the charges against former President Donald Trump and his co-defendants.
“In 2022, District Attorney Willis and I developed a personal relationship in addition to our professional association and friendship,” Wade wrote in an affidavit released by Willis’ office in court papers they filed Friday.
But the filing said there was no “personal relationship” at the time Wade was hired.
“Although District Attorney Willis and Special Prosecutor Wade have been professional associates and friends since 2019, there was no personal relationship between them in November 2021 at the time of Special Prosecutor Wade’s appointment,” the court papers said.
I would say that being “friends” for several years is a type of personal relationship, although in this pleading the word “personal” is an obvious stand-in for “sexual.” And it’s certainly possible – although I wouldn’t take Willis’ or Wade’s word for it – that their relationship didn’t become sexual till after they were working on the Trump case. But I find it hard to believe that, since they knew each other rather well prior to the appointment, Willis and Wade didn’t at least have the possibility of something like that in mind from the start.
Whether or not the court rules this matters in the Trump case depends on additional things, such as how qualified Wade was to try the case, whether he did enough work to justify his high salary, and whether Willis benefited from the extra money he was paid.
Even if is ultimately found that every bit of the hanky-panky occurred after Wade’s appointment, and even if he was highly qualified for the job, I find the degree of recklessness here to be interesting. I think both were drunk on power – the ability to bring the evil Trump down – and we all know that power is an aphrodisiac.
I think both were drunk on power – the ability to bring the evil Trump down – and we all know that power is an aphrodisiac.
–neo
And Revolutionary Power, even more so. Cue Bruce Cockburn:
_________________________________
When you’re lovers in a dangerous time
Sometimes you’re made to feel as if your love’s a crime—
But nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight—
Got to kick at the darkness ’til it bleeds daylight
–Bruce Cockburn, “Lovers In A Dangerous Time”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IX4gWkFqvU
_________________________________
The Revolution has a deeply romantic, sexual component. Not that anyone here is surprised by that either.
He was appointed in 2022 not 21
Ah yes, Kissinger’s quip about power being the ultimate aphrodisiac.
It’s a little more complicated than that. At that time, Nixon and Brezhnev were arguably the two most powerful men in the world, and I don’t recall either of them having to fight the ladies off.
“Drunk on power” says it all. Her admission against interest should be the end of the case. Because it opens the door to a useless swearing contest —did Fani have inappropriate feelings for her prosecutor “too soon,” i.e. when she was still deciding among candidates? What evidence can be adduced except her (useless ) denials, and the opinions of those around her who might describe her way of making calf eyes at her soon-to-be paramour? How many weeks of testimony do we need to uncover the obvious? Why should we, and the court, and the defendant have to suspend the honest and professional pursuit of justice while this entr’acte, worthy of a failed Jerry Springer episode, plays out?
In the other circus
https://twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1753554703647228325
Re: Kissinger / power / aphrodisiac
There is a “Futurama” episode where in the 31st century the Nixon head in a bottle sends the Kissinger head in a bottle to negotiate with evil aliens. Someone questions whether the Kissinger head is a good choice:
__________________________________
… looking like that, he talked his way into Jill St. John’s bed. Nuff said!
–Nixon head, “Futurama”
__________________________________
Nuff said!
Of course, Jill St. John dated, ahem, a remarkable number of celebrities:
__________________________________
Between marriages, St. John dated entertainment, sports, and political personalities including Ben Barnes, Gianni Bulgari, Sammy Cahn, Michael Caine, Oleg Cassini, Barry Coe, Sean Connery, Ahmet Ertegun, Robert Evans, Glenn Ford, David Frost, Jack Haley Jr., Bill Hudson, Henry Kissinger, Sidney Korshak, Peter Lawford, George Lazenby, Jim Lonborg, Trini López, Tom Mankiewicz, George Montgomery, Joe Namath, Jack Nicholson, Hugh O’Brian, Ogden Mills Phipps, Roman Polanski, Alejandro Rey, Tom Selleck, Frank Sinatra, Robert Vaughn, Giovanni Volpi, Adam West and David L. Wolper
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_St._John#Personal_lifK/i>
Sidney korshak was the real life tom regan mob fixer with hollywood
Part of me wonders if this is part of the plan or at least something they can roll with as a pretext to drop the case and not pick it up again in this venue without admitting to how politicized and baseless it was. Paranoid or overthinking it? Sure, maybe. But it comes to mind.