by Jeff Childers
The deep state struck back this week, as reported by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution in its article headlined, “Civil rights attorney to challenge Scott McAfee, judge in Fulton Trump case.”
Many states, including Florida and Georgia, elect trial judges. In those states, perhaps the most well-known way to punish a sitting judge is to gin up a candidate to run against them in the next election. Many, if not most established judges usually run unopposed. The reason is, the pool of lawyer candidates is already small, and most lawyers are reluctant to make an enemy of a well-established judge by running against them and losing.
Even if a judge occupies a safe seat, the addition of any candidate means the judge now has to run. That means expense, in time and money. He needs money to fund the campaign; either the judge must fund his campaign out of his own pocket, or he must fire up a campaign committee and commence fund-raising. Fund-raising is already a painful chore for most candidates, but it’s even harder for judges, who must avoid even the appearance of bias, and must endure electoral and ethics-rules restrictions that other types of candidates don’t.
And local-race judges normally enjoy anonymity. Voters who don’t know anything else about them tend to vote for the sitting judge by default.
But all that flies out the window whenever there’s a contentious media case during election season, like Judge MaCafee’s Fani Willis decision. Running a competitive candidate pours gasoline on the race and if the competing candidate shows up right before a major, high-visibility decision is made, it is clearly designed to send the judge a message.
The message here is, if white Judge MaCafee makes a decision unpopular with the majority of black Atlantans — if Fani’s unhinged racial bias claims stick — then Judge MaCafee will be facing an angry electorate and will likely lose. So, if he likes his job, Judge MaCafee better decide right, which means not angering a large, well-funded, highly-motivated group of opponents.
But on the other hand, if the judge rubber-stamps Fani’s reprehensible conduct, then conservatives and Trump supporters won’t forget it either.
Judge MaCafee now finds himself in Star Trek’s Kobayashi Maru scenario; in other words, he holds an untenable, no-win position.
If I could advise Judge MaCafee, if somehow he were to read this, I’d recommend he just focus on doing the right thing. That advice may seem overly simplistic, but the complex legal and political pot of radioactive spaghetti he faces will not yield to analysis. He simply won’t be able to think his way out of this; he should trust Providence and do whatever he believes is right.
Yeah, when faced with consequences either way, why not do the right thing? Of course, a judge should do the right thing in every case, but in today’s justice system, many that are more loyal to ideology than blind justice are always weighing their options.
After watching this judge allow fani to prosecute from the witness stand and not stop her, I’m betting he lets her stay on the Trump case.
He seemed intimidated already.
But that would only assure defeat under appeal. More ammo.
New Book Admits Fani Willis’ Get-Trump Investigation Began With Illegal Recording
Willis’ Radical Roots
A Political Activist in Georgia’s Election Office
Link
Fani Willis gets two primary challengers, right before today’s deadline.Judge Scott McAfee also gets two challengers.
Her problem with the phone call is that Raffensperger has already admitted he misrepresented the contents of the call (the recording of which he tried to destroy), so the “find me 11,800 votes” accusation is as dead as Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden’s eyes. Of course, for Fani’s purposes, she ignores reality, but inevitably the truth about the call will kill the case.
Yeah, this case was DOA except now it is even more atrocious. I would say even banana republics and dictatorial regimes do a better job of convicting those who are innocent.