It is beginning to look like Fani Willis, Georgia’s African-American Democrat Fulton County prosecutor who pledged to “get” Donald Trump, really is involved in a serious conflict of interest involving the case and even criminal conduct. The mainstream media is taking notice, it is no longer a “right wing conspiracy theory,” and most interestingly, Willis has not denied the allegations, which appeared in a court filing.

The New York Times published a story headlined “Atlanta D.A. Defends Qualifications of Outside Lawyer She Hired for Trump Case/At a historic Black church, Fani T. Willis pushed back against an accusation that Nathan Wade, the special prosecutor she brought on, was unqualified for the job” in which we learn that Willis spoke yesterday before the congregation of one of the oldest Black churches in Atlanta, which had invited her to be the keynote speaker for a service dedicated to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. She did not mention the details of allegations that she is in an intimate relationship with Nathan Wade, the special prosecutor she hired in 2021 for the Trump-getting, and has earned more than $650,000 in the job to date with some of the lucre benefiting her directly. Instead, she said in part,

“Wait a minute, God! You did not tell me,” she added, “as a woman of color it would not matter what I did — my motive, my talent, my ability and my character would be constantly attacked….A divorced single mom who doesn’t belong to the right social groups, who doesn’t necessarily come from the right family, doesn’t have the right pedigree — the assignment was just too high for lowly me. All I brought to the table, God, is my mind, my heart, my work ethic, my undying love for people and the community.”

Then Willis alluded to the controversy, arguing that Wade had been hired in the past by a Republican in another Georgia county, and that neither the official nor Mr. Wade had faced any criticism then. “I appointed three special counsels, as is my right to do. Paid them all the same hourly rate,” Ms. Willis said. “They only attacked one.” After setting up a comparison between her and Dr. King, whom she said had “personal indiscretions,” she said, “See, Dr. King was an extremely special, brilliant, godly man. But he was just a man and his journey was full of mistakes, pitfalls, pain and ugliness. He overcame those things, and he could change the world.”

Finally, she told the rapt assembled,

“You cannot expect Black women to be perfect and save the world. We need to be allowed to stumble. We are all flawed, sinners, unworthy, imperfect, damaged…But we are qualified upon His calling.”

I am moved to invoke Dr. Ian Malcolm, who memorably said upon encountering the product of a sick Triceratops in Jurassic Park,

Let’s begin shoveling…

1. The fact that Republicans hired Wade in the past is completely irrelevant. The allegations don’t involve Wade’s competence as an attorney. This issue is his conflict of interest as a supposedly independent prosecutor if he has a personal relationship with her, and her conflict of interest if she is benefiting from her prosecution of Trump. I assume Willis knows this, as lawyers are supposed to comprehend what conflicts of interest are. The public mostly does not. Offering this as any kind of proof that the allegations are contrived seems like deliberate obfuscation.

2. King’s personal “indiscretions”—he was a serial adulterer (or worse)—were irrelevant to his civil rights work. While they reflected on his personal character, they did not create any conflicts of interest. Willis’s relationship with Wade, if she has one, breaches several rules of legal ethics. Comparing herself to King is not just an invocation of one of the really bad rationalizations on the list, #32. The Unethical Role Model, it’s an incompetent one. King wasn’t a lawyer, and his sexual affairs, while they could have harmed his credibility and reputation if revealed, did not directly involve his mission. Willis is trying to attach herself to an icon in an effort to seek protection from his aura of virtue, but all she’s really doing is arguing that the allegations against her are based on her race. They aren’t. They are based on the ethical requirements of her profession and official role.

3. Playing the God card in politics or law is the mark of a scoundrel.

4. Ugh. Pursuing one of the prongs of the Democratic Party’s campaign to prevent Trump from winning the Presidency again is “saving the world.” At least she’s staying on her party’s message, but the job of the Fulton County District Attorney is not to “save the world,” but to enforce the laws without bias or partisan agendas.

5. The rationalization that “Black women” should be allowed some kind of special dispensation from the consequences of their actions is DEI cant at its worst, as well as another nauseating rationalization, 19. The Perfection Diversion, or “Nobody’s Perfect!” and “Everybody makes mistakes!” In the legal profession, a serious breach of ethics will not be excused with a shrug and a “Do better next time!,” especially a breach of ethics in a high profile case with national implications.

Over at conservative Hot Air, David Strom concludes, “To me, that sure sounds like an admission that she did something wrong, and she is retreating to the rarely effective but always useful counteraccusation. Fani Willis, you see, is MLK in a skirt, and just like MLK, she has sinned. And because she shares the same skin tone as MLK, she should be forgiven for any sin she committed.”

It sounds like that to me, too. Ann Althouse also weighed in, saying, “She wants us to focus on his race and on her race and to think the criticism of her is entirely a racial matter. And God is on the same page.” Then Ann adds, “If she really believes that the prosecution of Trump is a mission from God, it reinforces Trump’s characterization of it as a witch hunt.”

I think Willis is metaphorical toast, and so is her case.

One last point: I don’t like the idea of the news media using what public figures say in church as fodder for stories. I can’t say it’s unethical, exactly: the services are open to the public, and many churches are active politically. Willis appears to have been using her opportunity to address the church as a way to build public sympathy and support in the maelstrom she knows is coming. It still feels like a breach of privacy to me, as well as the Golden Rule.