But he's never prosecuted a felony or a RICO case, according to this.
https://www.justsecurity.org/91627/the-fulton-county-disqualification-allegations-myths-facts-and-unknowns/

He's made $650,000 so far, has no prosecutorial felony/RICO experience, and he's romantically involved with her, after knowing her for a long time. Prima facie, this looks bad.

Indeed. I'm very unimpressed by Fani T. Willis. Can't afford these kinds of slip-ups considering the gravity of the case. But at the same time, as the article notes, there are a number of other cases involving Trump. The January 6th trial will be the truly momentous one - no slip ups from Jack Smith (although the trial date has slipped.) But if Trump is convicted of those charges, and even if it's technically possible to be elected President after conviction, in practical terms I can't see how his candidacy would survive. I also wonder if the Supreme Court's decision on his eligibility will take the outcome of that trial into account, because it damn well should.

Much of the negative reporting was based on Roman's accusations, which the JUSTSECURITY article shows to be false. It appears to me that this article, plus her filing (assuming she's being truthful) exonerates her of everything but poor judgement in getting romantically involved.

Re: never having worked a RICO case- the article indicates it's not problematic because of his role as lead prosecutor. An attorney with RICO expertise reports to him.

It's the first ever trial of an ex-president and the lead prosecutor has never before prosecuted a felony??? That passes your smell test?

what does that imply to you?

I'm not a lawyer, but in my IT career, project leaders didn't need technical expertise, they needed management skills. I related this to what the article said:

As critics allege, it appears to be true that Wade does not have experience in prosecuting RICO cases or other felony cases. “An AJC [Atlanta Journal Constitution] review of court records in metro Atlanta found no evidence he ever prosecuted a felony.” However, many prosecutors do not have experience with RICO cases and such experience should not necessarily be required to be one of the multiple special prosecutors on this case – particularly given that Wade serves as the lead prosecutor, and another special prosecutor on the case is a leading RICO expert. At any rate, Wade has relevant experience handling felony cases as a defense lawyer.

also

Willis told the New York Times that she hired Wade after several other candidates turned her down.

Fanny Willis is corrupt. End of story. But it’s a common thread throughout the anti-Trump movement. They reveal themselves to have no moral standing and are often worse than their folk devil. It’s all a grift for power and money and the adulation of millions of gullible news readers.

Corrupt in what way? What law did she break? The common thread I see is that Trump supporters have no problem with the "Jared and Ivanka Big Grift Show" but suddenly pretend they have such a high bar for moral and ethical standards if there is anything they don't like on the liberal side. Hunter Biden leveraged his last name for business dealings. Fani hired a man she previously had a personal relationship with. Oh, for shame! But never mind things like paying off a porn star for an affair Trump had with while his wife was pregnant, or Jared and Ivanka getting high level jobs at the White House or Jared Kushner's brand new investment company getting $2 billion from the Saudis months after leaving his job at the White House. You want to complain about immoral behavior and grift...

Unless you can cite a law that Fani Willis broke, it's just "conduct that you don't like" which is obviously hypocritical compared to worse conduct from the Trump family that you conveniently ignore.

https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-investigations/jared-and-ivanka-made-up-to-640-million-in-the-white-house/

It's a common thread among members of the Trump cult, that they echo his ad hominem attacks and ignore their saviour's legal and moral issues.

If Willis broke the law, I hope she suffers the legal consequences. Can you say that about Trump?

Corrupt in what way? — GRWelsh

The primary defense used by the MAGA nation is something we learned on the playground as children. "I know you are but what am I" or "I am rubber and you are glue. Whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you".

In response to charges that Trump is corrupt the response is: Willis or Biden the Democrats or the Justice Department or whoever is part of the "anti-Trump movement" is corrupt. Different allegation same response. He would claim that Carroll raped him except he is afraid that would make him look weak.

There is nothing to echo. Through their grift they reveal their own malfeasance. That’s one thing. But another is that Anti-Trumpism is a license for corruption. By pretending to save the republic, protect our democracy, or whatever the phrase is, they provide their fellow travellers with justification to excuse poor behavior and to support it.

Someone like me gets to sit back and watch as politicians, pundits, and their gullible readers have to turn around and cheer on and defend everything from political persecution, the weaponization of the courts and the justice system, censorship, to spying on political campaigns. It reads like an Orwell novel.

The degenerate con man/savior is the real victim!

It's a hard choice - between a narcissist con man and a supporter and facilitator of genocide and ethnic cleansing. I think I prefer the nut-job myself, but it's your call, America.

At least you get a choice. In the UK we get to choose between a supporter and facilitator of genocide and ethnic cleansing, and another supporter and facilitator of genocide and ethnic cleansing.

There is nothing to echo — NOS4A2

You're echoing accusations about Willis, treating them as established fact. As I noted, there have been accusations- and many of them have been debunked (see: https://www.justsecurity.org/91627/the-fulton-county-disqualification-allegations-myths-facts-and-unknowns/). She may have done something illegal or unethical, but it's premature to draw that conclusion at this point.

You're also echoing the claim that the courts and justice system are "weaponized". This has all the elements of conspiracy theory. It appeals to Trump cult members because it supports the narrative that Trump is a victim.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

It's a hard choice - between a narcissist con man and a supporter and facilitator of genocide and ethnic cleansing — unenlightened

What makes you think Trump would be any less supportive of Israel, in its efforts to eliminate Hamas?

And you honestly cannot tell enough difference between Biden and Trump to decide between them? — tim wood

I can tell the difference. And I choose the madman fraudster over the war criminal. Or I would, if I got to choose. And with that ringing endorsement of the hero of the thread, I leave you to it.

What makes you think Trump would be any less supportive of Israel, in its efforts to eliminate Hamas? — Relativist

I'll convict him when I hear and see him being so. But I would bet on him reversing Biden policies just because they're Biden's.

I can tell the difference. — unenlightened

But wouldn't your denunciation apply equally to any plausible candidate to the American Presidency? If if both candidates were to drop out of the race, would you expect anyone to appear who would reverse or atone for what you consider the crimes of the American state?

No. It received no votes from Democrats. — Relativist

You have to think outside the box. They didn't have to vote yes, but they knew it was going to pass and become a law. Math works. They all benefited from it -- ask any democrat if they refused the tax credits and deductions to lower their taxes. None of them objected to it when it went into effect. All this without voting "yes" to the bill. So, not only they "preserved" their constituents faith during the process of passing it, they reaped the benefits of the TCJA aftwards.

A lot of fear that people refuse to address, refuse to introspect. — baker

Absolutely!

You have to think outside the box. — L'éléphant

What's your point? I simply answered your question. My point was that it's silly to just give credit or blame to a sitting President based on the status of the economy. Rather, we should credit or blame them for policy we believe to be beneficial or detrimental. Whether or not the Ryan tax cuts were beneficial or detrimental is open to debate. In one sense, everyone who paid less taxes got some benefit (some more than others) , but it also resulted in higher deficits, and an increase in national debt.

But wouldn't your denunciation apply equally to any plausible candidate to the American Presidency? — Wayfarer

If that's the case, your democracy is as hollow as ours, and voting is a farce. One might as well be in Russia., where the war criminal always gets elected too.

But I would bet on him reversing Biden policies just because they're Biden's. — unenlightened

Super naive to think republicans wouldn't support Israel if in power. We fund Israel as much as we do because of conservative policies.

Super naive to think republicans wouldn't support Israel — flannel jesus

You may be right. what has Trump said though?

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/13/politics/donald-trump-israel-netanyahu-diplomacy/index.html

You may be right. what has Trump said though? — unenlightened

He's a compulsive liar. I think it's very unlikely that if he were in office, his Christian nationalist foreign policy handlers would let him do anything to harm or even inconvenience Israel.

He's saying what he's saying because it's an opportunity to criticise Biden. He previously said he hopes the American economy fails while bidens president - he has no ethical values, only things which are convenient for him and those which are inconvenient. An opportunity to criticise Biden is convenient, and so he took that opportunity.

his Christian nationalist foreign policy handlers would let him do anything to harm or even inconvenience Israel. — flannel jesus

Did you mean, "wouldn't"?

More precisely, they would not do anything to prevent what they believe is the prophesied final holy war that will usher in the end time and their being raptured.

I said "I think it's very unlikely that they would".

I think it's very unlikely that if he were in office, his Christian nationalist foreign policy handlers would let him do anything to harm or even inconvenience Israel. — flannel jesus

Do you think I should have said "It's unlikely that they wouldn't"?

oops. Got it.

No problem brother, hope you're enjoying your sunday.