Trump Georgia Case: Race Card-Playing MSM Rush to Fani Willis’ Rescue After Disastrous Testimony
“For many Black women, the inquiries into Willis’ romantic and financial life were rife with tropes and accusations often unfairly levied at Black women.”
It was a wild week in Georgia as the misconduct hearing for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis got underway, with special prosecutor Nathan Wade and Willis both taking the stand, and a former friend of Willis’ contradicting her on when Willis’ “personal relationship” with Wade started.
Willis’ testimony, as we previously reported, was explosive in nature, with Willis being highly combative with defense attorney Ashleigh Merchant, at one point saying she preferred Grey Goose vodka to wine, and at another point seemingly admitting to keeping some cash from her first campaign and holding onto it for personal use.
Because Willis did herself no favors with her testimony—and because she’s a powerful Democrat who is prosecuting former President Donald Trump, the mainstream media have swooped in to rescue her by doing one of the things they do best: trot out the victim/race cards as a way to suggest she’s being unfairly targeted based on her race:
Fani Willis' testimony evokes long-standing frustrations for Black women leaders https://t.co/7NmNg5t4af
— The Associated Press (@AP) February 17, 2024
Why the Case Against Fani Willis Feels Familiar to Black Women https://t.co/u6cBUzwmKj
— Michael Hall.CCI (@AugustEve2012) February 16, 2024
In both the Associated Press and New York Times pieces, they quoted numerous black female lawyers who said they were deeply offended and “disgusted” over Willis having to answer questions about her personal life and allegedly being held to a double standard.
From the AP:
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is used to prosecuting high-profile, challenging cases. But as she parried questions about her own personal conduct from the witness stand against the legal teams for defendants her office has accused of election interference, many Black women recognized a dispiriting scene.
“It absolutely feels familiar. There is no secret that the common sentiment among Black women in positions of power (is that they) must over-perform to be seen as equals to their counterparts,” said Jessica T. Ornsby, a family litigation attorney in the Washington, D.C., area.
“Here, Ms. Willis is being scrutinized for things that are not directly related to her job performance, in ways we see other Black women regularly picked apart,” Ornsby said.
[…]
For many Black women, the inquiries into Willis’ romantic and financial life were rife with tropes and accusations often unfairly levied at Black women.
Keir Bradford-Grey, a partner at the law firm Montgomery McCracken in Philadelphia, found the questions about Willis’ personal life “disgusting.” She also said the episode had disturbing implications for Black women in leadership roles: “I can’t imagine a world where we have to continue to be treated like this as we seek leadership roles, and we do them well.”
And from the New York Times:
Some lamented Ms. Willis’s conduct as a mistake, but not one that should remove her from the case against Mr. Trump. Others, thinking about their own experiences in the workplace, suggested another concern: They feel that Black women are held to a different standard and that Ms. Willis should have known that her identity, along with the enormous political stakes of the case, would create a white-hot spotlight on her personal conduct.
As I read these articles and the narrative that the attorneys—and the reporters themselves—were pushing about black women allegedly being held to a higher standard, I thought back to the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanugh and how their personal and professional lives were put under the microscope in extreme, brutal ways, and then I wondered “what alternative reality are Willis’ defenders living in?”
I mean, are we just supposed to just look the other way regarding Willis’ alleged offenses simply because she’s a black woman? Further, isn’t advocating that we do so a double standard and racist in and of itself?
Turns out, I wasn’t the only one:
"It should be okay for Black women leaders to act unethically" https://t.co/Le4ZvPK7YE
— Fusilli Spock (@awstar11) February 17, 2024
If a strong black woman wants to sleep with her subordinates and pay them with taxpayer money she should allowed to do so without public scrutiny or shame. https://t.co/9I6n2VA5sa
— @amuse (@amuse) February 17, 2024
It’s now racist to call out the utter incompetence of a partisan hack because she just happens to be black. You can’t make this up. https://t.co/lo8CyGElik
— Jason Rantz on KTTH Radio (@jasonrantz) February 17, 2024
The ethical and unconflicted expectations of district attorneys does not change based on race and gender.
If you want to be a prosecutor, then you should be expected to adhere to the highest ethical standards. https://t.co/oA8BVJ4N0v
— Scott Greenfield (@ScottGreenfield) February 17, 2024
This is a story about impropriety and probable corruption by a DA who dripped condescension with every word while she self-immolated on the stand.
Identity politics is a mind virus that needs to make this a story about successful black women across the country. https://t.co/TvT4gbxtfR
— pragmatometer (@pragmatometer) February 17, 2024
Those that abuse their positions like Fani Willis should be held accountable like everyone else. It's ridiculous how you want to use the race card to deflect from her unethical behavior. https://t.co/Z8bAOWSIx6
— Nicole 🍊 (@literarygeek78) February 17, 2024
No, we ain’t gonna use race as an excuse to break the law. Especially when you’re talking about someone who KNOWS the law very well and is a District Attorney. Ignoring her law credentials & reducing her to “she’s just a black woman” cut her some slack ” is racist AF. https://t.co/vSD1E3kIjD
— TN Perspective (@SpeakinFromTN) February 17, 2024
Indeed.
— Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via Twitter. —
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Asking questions employing more than 12 words is unfair to protected minorities! RACISM!!!!
TGG. Isn’t it racist to use any word that has more than three syllables?
Asking for a friend.
It must be. Watermelon is 4 syllables.
Yeah, but it’s two words stuck together, as in German, so it doesn’t count 🙂
Speaking of which, I’m amazed at the number of people — including major manufacturers, who can be expected to know their own products — who think “chickpeas” is two words. Last time I was at the supermarket there were about six brands of canned chickpeas on the shelf, all of which spelled it as two words. And I’ve even seen two minor brands that spell it “chic peas”.
Chickpea is really two words? Why that’s Garbanzo!
Margarine is no longer called margarine.
Margarine is plant based non-dairy something something.
Chic peas are used as buttons on gowns from the finest Paris couture houses.
Cicer arietinum is commonly known by both divided and conjoined spelling. Either is accepted
Not according to Merriam-Webster, dictionary.com, Cambridge, or Oxford Learners’
I’m thinking “entitlement.”
This is what comes from basing employment decisions on AA rather than merit. Fat Fani Willis cannot be saved due to arrogance and low IQ,
Fani is the mouthy, entitled black woman that is quick to anger I have coexisted with for 59 years.
She just showed how true the stereotype is.
I’m not interested in your skin, it is the disgusting character on display that loves her greedy life.
With her, it is a partially inherited trait after listening to her father testify last week.
You have lived with her for 59yrs? What did her boyfriend have to say about that?
“…tropes and accusations often unfairly levied at Black women.”
But leveled quite fairly against Ms. Willis.
This is why I have little time for the whole idea of “tropes”. I kind of understand what the word means, though I find I can’t explain it to myself in simple words; but I feel the whole idea is an invalid way of extending an offense, whether it’s racism, antisemitism, or something else, to cases where it doesn’t apply.
Speaking as a Jew, I do not care if someone uses an antisemitic “trope”. I care if someone says something that is actually antisemitic, something that betrays his antisemitic thoughts and/or feelings.
For that matter, I don’t even care all that much about that, so long as he’s conscious of it and doesn’t allow it to influence his actions. I prefer frank antisemites such as H. L. Mencken and G. K. Chesterton, who stood up for Jews’ rights and against mistreating us, to people who are careful never to say something that sounds antisemitic but give aid and comfort to those who are trying to shove us into cattle cars.
But I’m certainly OK with someone who doesn’t say anything antisemitic but who says things that evoke historical antisemitic “tropes”. Yes, the Jew as puppet master is an antisemitic trope, and when it was trotted out historically about the Rothschilds it was consciously antisemitic. When it’s occasionally trotted out today about them it betrays either antisemitism or astounding ignorance. But when it’s used against George Soros it’s just the simple truth, and not antisemitic at all.
(Though of course posting it could be motivated by antisemitism. As we all know Branco is the farthest thing from an antisemite, but it is likely that some antisemites have reposted his innocuous cartoon for their own nefarious purposes, but that’s on them. And if a known antisemite were to draw the same cartoon I would understand that they were motivated, at least in part, by their antisemitism. But that would be based on external evidence, not on anything in the cartoon itself.)
This is nothing. Another black “authority” has just suggested that the best way to handle black crime is to <a href="https://modernity.news/2024/02/18/black-activist-lawyers-idea-to-stop-crime-just-legalize-crime/"just make all criminal acts by blacks legal..
If it is limited to walled-off sections of cities, and they need a formal government pass to get out, fine. Let the good ones sort it out and leave the non-blacks alone.
I know there some blacks who are both educated and intelligent, but for every Clarence Thomas, there seem to be a thousand like this idiot.
I don’t know how I screwed that up. Worse, my mind went blank on how to correct it. Let me try again: …is to just make all criminal acts by blacks legal.
That’s a rather unfair article. Crump is actually making a very valid point in that quote, never mind that his cause is invalid.
He did not suggest that all criminal acts by blacks should be legal. He correctly said that he could get rid of all crime by the simple trick of repealing all criminal laws, thus making it impossible to violate them, but that this wouldn’t change anything in the real world. The acts that used to be crimes would still be happening, and if they were problems before they’d still be problems.
His claim is that white society has deliberately created crimes that are not malum per se but merely malum prohibitum, with the intent of criminalizing black culture. “Blacks do X; let’s make X a felony, so we can lock them all up”. Of course that does not happen; it’s a sick fantasy that woke people, white and black, tell themselves and everyone else. But it could happen. It’s logically sound.
Logically sound for a legal theory class discussion, perhaps. Problem is, all of the legal eggheads in the world cannot resolve the penchant of humans to act like jackasses so they can exploit each and every excess of possible human weakness to their own destruction. Witness two situations: a) the recent re-introduction of drug control laws in the Netherlands due to the mess created by tourists (primarily British, but also other Europeans) in Amsterdam primarily; and b) the asinine, dangerous decriminalization of hard drugs in Oregon which has sent drug overdose and hospitalizations soaring in the foolish hope that addicts would seek treatment. The Oregon example is what every addiction psychiatrist feared would happen—namely that addicts and their enablers have no self-control, and giving them free rein was a disaster in the making. Not saying your logical argument is wrong, however I’m making the point that just because one can does not mean one should.
We are talking about a discussion between a group of friends, that was recorded and leaked. Not about a political manifesto. Crump’s specific point is valid; his general point is not. But the article completely misrepresents him, pretending he actually called for repealing all laws. And txvet’s paraphrase is even worse, pretending that he called for legalizing acts on a racial basis. He simply didn’t do that.
Just in case it wasn’t clear, I have absolutely no time for Crump. If I see he is representing someone I automatically assume their case has no merit. But the point he makes here happens to be a valid one, as far as it goes, which isn’t anywhere near as far as he takes it.
Oh, it happens, Milhouse. Probably the most famous example is that during the Reagan years, Joe Biden got this law passed:
And who was a bigger danger to society?
I don’t think there’s any evidence that that was motivated by racism. Crack was new at the time, and I think it was motivated by an exaggerated idea of how much more dangerous this new drug was than the old familiar one.
Not clear what relevance that question has to cocaine and cocaine derivatives.
I don’t think I understand you. You are referencing a law that Biden supported, imposing heavy penalties on the brand new drug called “crack”, which was reputed to be very dangerous, much more dangerous than the familiar drug cocaine. That is enough to explain why the penalties it imposed were so heavy. Some people find any new threat to be more scary than familiar threats, and therefore tend to overreact.
I see no need to suppose that the law, let alone the fact that it didn’t reach back and raise the penalties for an existing drug for which penalties were long established, was motivated by knowledge that the new drug was popular among black people while the existing one was more popular among white people.
Yeah it’s fantastical nonsense. It should be more explicitly called out as such. You are too patient to legitimize this folly with your explanation IMO.
I get why you did it, but he’s not really worth defending on this hill.
Among 10 billion examples, going back a few decades:
There’s nothing more frightening in America today than an angry White man
– CNN November 21, 2021
http://tinyurl.com/263pyate
Today’s Racism: not your grandpappymassa’s racism! Now gluten-free with Chia seeds and protein from 30 varieties of crickets.
That essay at CNN is utter filth and dishonest agitprop, written by a victimhood-wallowing black guy, full of angst over the alleged racism of “the white man.”
Never mind that the vast majority of black homicide victims are killed by black criminal sociopaths in urban areas and ghettos across the U.S., with nary a scintilla of outrage from the author, or, his fellow Dhimmi-crats. And, let’s not forgot about the millions of black babies who’ve been aborted over the past several decades.
Black lives only “matter” to the extent that they can be exploited by the media and the Dhimmi-crats for cheap political gain. All the other victims are discarded as politically useless, and, quickly forgotten.
This hearing took an interesting twist right at the end of Terrence Bradley’s testimony. It may get spicy when it resumes because Bradley’s attorney-client privilege with Wade is in question. Bradley had apparently reached out to the Trump side so the DA’s side impeached him but opened a can of worms in the process.
Holding black people to minimum standards is racist. Sheesh.
Holding black people to any standard is racist, according to the race hustlers.
Blacks with an IQ greater than 50 should be ashamed how their race hustlers make them look like incompetent stooges.
The Dhimmi-crats played the same stupid shtick with ex-Harvard president, Claudine Gay — alleging that the simple act of pointing out the myriad instances of her brazen, blatant, unrepentant and self-serving plagiarism, was allegedly racist.
What’s truly racist is the Dhimmi-crats’ notion that it’s allegedly wrong to hold blacks and other people “of color” to the same high standards of professionalism, ethics and integrity that everyone else strives to adhere to. This is the Dhimmi-crats’ utterly racist and corrosive bigotry of low expectations, at work, implying that blacks are too stupid, too infantile and too lacking in sophistication, to adhere to professional and ethical norms of behavior.
Fan willis legal defense strategy: you raaaaaaaacist.
Seeing the judge is up for reelection and fearing a riotous black backlash, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if she skates but with a severe reprimand and no charges of any kind. Anyone want to bet?
I read a piece today saying that Judge McAfee worked for her at one point.
If true he should have disqualified himself.
What I read was that he had worked “with” her, but not “for” her: they were both assistant DAs during some period of overlap. But they reported to the then elected DA. Not such a big deal. I don’t know how big the staff is at that DA’s office, but it is entirely possible not to know most of the other assistants in a large government law department.
The race card was maxed out some time ago. IOW it has been declined.
In general, the worst sort of boss you could ever have is a black woman – especially a fat one. You should do everything in your power to avoid this venture into hell.
Unfortunately, Traitor Joe is busy stuffing our federal judiciary with black women. Most people have absolutely no idea what sort of insane lunacy we have coming our way.
Blacks make up about 12% of the US population. THey are, as a group, much less successful than others and tend to score the lowest on just about every standardized academic and IQ exam, so one would figure that, in elite circles, blacks should probably see representation on the order of 1 or 2%, if going by merit. Over the past two years, Traitor Joe has appointed black judges over 60% of the time.. That’s right – that’s not a typo – OVER 60% black judicial appointees. ANd almost half of Traitor Joe’s overall appointees are black women! Almost half!!
it’s a truly insane situation that this nation is going to have to deal with (unsuccessfully) until its end … which looks to be not that far into the future. The numbers are truly staggering and the situation more dire than most can comprehend. INSANE.
judge McFee is in a tough situation, the same one that whatever he does he can’t win. He would rather wash his hands of this.
To me his ruling is simple, The question of whether there was impropriety is moot. The different statements that Wade made, the fact that payments were made in cash, the fact that the friend testified there was impropriety, and the fact that the lawyer somewhat confirms the friends testimony all are enough to create an appearance of impropriety and she and Wade should be disqualified.
Maybe he is more honest that there is impropriety. Maybe he is corrupt, but there is a saying “even a crooked cashier is honest when they know the boss is watching”, He may be so currupt and stupid. that he rules in her favor. In which case an appeals court may overrule him and probably replace him..
My mind went immediately to the Democrats’ defense of Bill Clinton when he was charged with perjury. At that time we were assured, over and over, by every “expert” the Dems could rustle up, that (a) perjury in civil cases is never prosecuted; and (b) there is an unwritten exception to the law of perjury, under which about ones sex life is socially and morally acceptable, and therefore never prosecuted.
The New York Times, of all outfits, did some research and came up with eight people who were at that very moment serving time in federal prisons for doing exactly what Clinton did: perjury about their sex lives in the course of a civil proceeding. All eight were serving under Bill Clinton’s authority; if he truly believed that perjury about one’s sex life in a civil case is okay, then he had a duty to pardon them, and the fact that he didn’t proved that he did not accept either of the ideas being promoted by his defenders.
Not only perjury, but subornation of perjury.
FWIW. Legions of women on twitter are saying Fani wore her red dress backwards*; that no dress ever made have zippers located on the front near the crotch.
*things men don’t pay attention to.
I noticed and asked my wife. She assures me that the way the lines of the dress are sown strongly indicates the Fani did not wear the dress backwards.
So it was designed for getting nekkid in a hurry aka “slut cut”. Good to know.
Diana Rigg she ain’t.
Maybe for easy access for Wade during a break? Just saying.
It was amazing how the MSM was so depressed the first night by Fanis appearance in court and admitting that it was a disaster, and by the next morning, the same people were circling the wagons around her
As predictable as a rooster crowing at sunrise — the water-carrying, deferential, obsequious and gleefully servile mainstream media lapdogs/trained seals/propagandists/shills rush to help parrot/amplify/propagate the vile Dhimmi-crats’ preferred Narrative(TM) of transparently contrived and fallacious racial victimhood and grievance.
Almost like some type of Central Intelligence is controlling what they all say.
“So, it’s gonna be like that, huh!?”
I don’t think of Willis as the prototypical “angry black woman.” I think of her as just a stupid black woman.
Being a horrible and corrupt person has no race it seems. To use race and sex as an excuse does no one any favors especially those that work hard and get where they are through competence such as Condi Rice.
Will her angry black woman throwing out racist charges when caught work? We will see how big the stones are on that judge. She should be disbarred and removed from office for this display much less her corruption. I expect better decorum from DA’s and other elected officials. If she doesn’t respect the court and our legal system why should I?
What is it with these blacks? Even when they don’t have absurd made up names they insist on weird pronunciations that nobody can follow or remember. Kamala, Colin, Fani. It’s racism no matter how you pronounce them.
Fani willis has her dress, and wig, on backwards??
How can she demand anybody take her seriously??
“It’s now racist to call out the utter incompetence of a partisan hack because she just happens to be black. You can’t make this up.”
“Now??”
Jason, dude, it’s been true ever since day one of Affirmative Action.
We need to start a black female lawyer hall of fame. Oberlin has two nominees in Twillie Ambar and Donica Varner. On a plus note, they aren’t operating on people or flying planes.
I was thinking the other day that I would never be able to perform as a college president. Intellectually it would not be a challenge. The difficulty would come from trying to operate under their rules and practices, which are entirely devoid of thought and logic. As my buddy JR Ewing put it, “once you lose your integrity, the rest is simple.”
>> “… at another point seemingly admitting to keeping some cash from her first campaign and holding onto it for personal use”
This was the key issue in her testimony, and one that has gotten far too little attention.
Its not really clear to me on what basis you can say that Willis’s testimony was disastrous. She pointed out quite successfully that there was no conflict, she made the Trump lawyers look rather foolish.
“Common sentiment” doesn’t mean “established fact”.
“Often” and “in this case” are also not the same thing.
Fraud and corruption are not related to job performance?
“Black women leaders” is ungrammatical. Please use “black female leaders”, as “women” is a noun not an adjective.
I;m not biased. I believe that anyone can be unimpressive, whatever their pigmentation, or plumbing.