Mendacity and Corruption in the Judiciary
Something is seriously wrong with American law schools and the disciplinary outfits that are supposed to monitor corrupt conduct of practitioners. You can see the effects of this degradation in the outrageous behavior of government prosecutors and in the judiciary, which ignores its responsibility to decide fairly and without bias. We are churning out dishonest, corrupt lawyers and judges who are more than willing to look the other way at such behavior, condoning the most obvious selective partisan prosecutions. As the awareness of the failure of the judicial system grows, the consequences will be enormous -- respect for the traditional way of resolving disputes and obeying the law are fundamental aspects of a civilized, prosperous nation. Once that is lost, other less tenable means will be employed.
The focus this week was on the absurd case in Georgia, where D.A. Fani Willis is criminalizing Donald Trump’s challenge to the integrity of Georgia’s presidential election in 2020.
In the hearings, we learned of the prosecutor’s illicit affair with someone she then hired for almost three-quarter of a million dollars, a man whom evidence indicated committed perjury in his divorce case. Worse, both Willis and Wade appeared to commit perjury about when their affair began. (Something the judge elided in a too-facile stroke.) The defense argued that the prosecutors must be removed for conflict of interest. Judge McAfee that is hearing the case once worked for Willis, and both he and his wife contributed to her campaign for the office of district attorney. On Friday he issued his decision in the case (days after his own previously uncontested reelection bid suddenly was opposed).
In relevant part he ordered:
An outsider could reasonably think that the District Attorney is not exercising her independent professional judgment totally free of any compromising influences. As long as Wade remains on the case, this unnecessary perception will persist. The testimony introduced, including that of the District Attorney and Wade, did not put these concerns to rest. During argument, the Defendants’ focus largely pivoted from the financial concerns to disproving the testimony of the District Attorney, namely that her romantic relationship actually predated the November 2021 hiring of Wade. On that front, the Court makes a few brief observations. First, the Court finds itself unable to........
© American Thinker
visit website