Zone1 Are White People Wrong to Judge Fani Willis by Our Standards of Marital Fidelity and Ethics?

[Lisa558]

No one is judging her fidelity. Her unethical conduct has impacted her professional performance and is properly judged.

She used a high profile case with a politically unpopular defendant to game the system. She assumed that because democrats hate Trump so much, she would never be questioned. She assumed that being a black female was enough to silence any detractors. She was wrong.

She assumed that because of everything she was able to get away with up until then, because she was a black female - and played the race card all her life. She showed herself to have average intelligence at best, and most likely got into Emory due to Affirmative Action.

Did you know her “daddy” was a founder of a faction of the Black Panthers? She probably grew up with the attitude that the white man owes her.

 

[Seymour Flops]

"Our standards"... what is that?
Are you talking "our" as being white people?

I think their should be human standards. A standard of decency that makes everyone's lives better.
As a productive human being you should be able to live your life without dirtbags like this piece of work fucking you over.

I agree.

But it was Miss Willis, who brought up the race issue. At first I was dismissive. But then I realize, how insensitive that is. I don’t want to be that white guy that assumes that he knows how Black people are “supposed to think.“

So I reached out, hoping to learn. But unfortunately, the only self identified black poster to contribute to this thread, offered nothing but a profanity laced personal attack.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I agree.

But it was Miss Willis, who brought up the race issue. At first I was dismissive. But then I realize, how insensitive that is. I don’t want to be that white guy that assumes that he knows how Black people are “supposed to think.“

So I reached out, hoping to learn. But unfortunately, the only self identified black poster to contribute to this thread, offered nothing but a profanity laced personal attack.

That is how Willis was clearly raised to think. Maybe not by her parents, probably not her parents, but for sure her education, peers, political party she belongs to and social media.
Black people are trained to believe they are victims, and have a right to compensate for it.
I doubt very seriously she thinks she did anything wrong. That may seem impossible for you and I to comprehend, but you and I aren't constantly told we are victims. You and I don't believe we are entitled to act poorly and selfishly.

 

[Lisa558]

That is how Willis was clearly raised to think. Maybe not by her parents, probably not her parents, but for sure her education, peers, political party she belongs to and social media.
Black people are trained to believe they are victims, and have a right to compensate for it.
I doubt very seriously she thinks she did anything wrong. That may seem impossible for you and I to comprehend, but you and I aren't constantly told we are victims. You and I don't believe we are entitled to act poorly and selfishly.

Her father was part of the Black Panthers. She learned to think that way from him, and then it was compounded by the other influences you mention.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Her father was part of the Black Panthers. She learned to think that way from him, and then it was compounded by the other influences you mention.

Thanks - I just looked up her father a bit, yeah there is that. He was even a founder of the California chapter. And who has both said, and wrote that the police department is the enemy of the people.
No wonder this woman is so fucked up.

 

[Lisa558]

Thanks - I just looked up her father a bit, yeah there is that. He was even a founder of the California chapter. And who has both said, and wrote that the police department is the enemy of the people.
No wonder this woman is so fucked up.

Yup. She grew up with the attitude that blacks are oppressed victims, and that whites owe them. She probably felt that she was ENTITLED to get into Emory and ENTITLED to be D.A.

And she certainly had that defiant attitude of hers instilled by “daddy.”

Now she’ll just be another angry black woman on The View, raking in millions while crying about how oppressed she was.

 

[el midgetron]

 

[el midgetron]

 

[el midgetron]

Yep, very serious people.

 

[el midgetron]

 

[Failzero]

... and FailZero.

Im not that rich

 

[Coyote]

The “assault” was clearly fake, and the verdict indeed motivated by TDS. There was no witnesses nor evidence other than a decades old allegation.

No. It was not clearly fake, particularly in light of some of Trump’s own words regarding sex, entitlement and women witnesses, and the fact that a jury also found him guilty. So…here we are, double standards and Republican morality.

Again, I’ve never met a Republican who supported Trumps sexual immorality.

Can’t say I’ve seen any Democrats…Black or White, “supporting“ Fani’s “sexual immorality” either. If that is the only requirement, what is the point of this thread?

Apparently though, Trump’s immorality is not enough to stop supporters from supporting him which makes implications that there is some sort of racial aspect to morality questionable.

I disagree. It it a legitimate question based on Willis’ own statement.


Double standards abound. Anyone who claims at double standards are only used by one side is themselves using a double standard.

So why are you starting a thread based on utilizing double standards?

In the case of Miss Willis, she is going using the power of the justice system to go after a former president now the presumed future president. Her intent is to convict him so that he can’t be president no matter how many people vote for him. In doing so she has literally claimed that she is out to “save the world“

She has enough to go to trial, it is a serious case, and it began before he announced he was running again.

Ate you trying to claim that if someone decides to run for office, they are immune from criminal prosecution of any kind? That’s a new one. I do believe we have had candidates running for an office while being investigated for corruption right? Why is Trump different?

And, specifically, how does any of this have a bearing on the merits of the case itself? It really doesn’t, it just effects HER credibility and could well require a new prosecutor to lead it.

By those actions, I believe she sets a higher standard for herself. Not a double standard, a higher standard.

The only thing that requires a higher standard is her job, not her case. It is no different than any judicial position where even the appearance of impropriety should be avoided (Clarence Thomas*cough*)

As well, she should. It’s called the “clean hands doctrine.”

Clearly, she has failed to meet that standard, not only in her sex life, but in her financial chicanery as well.

Her sex life is no one’s business, and especially not the business of a Trump supporter who gives the man occupying the highest office in the land a free pass on it while condemning her.

Now the financial chicanery is a whole ‘nother matter and that could be serious, not the affair which your OP focuses on.

 

[Coyote]

Wade and his wife have been separated since 2015.

What does this have to do with color? You certainly sound like a racist.

That is why making it an issue is a farce.

 

[Seymour Flops]

No. It was not clearly fake, particularly in light of some of Trump’s own words regarding sex, entitlement and women witnesses, and the fact that a jury also found him guilty. So…here we are, double standards and Republican morality.

Of course, I knew this thread would quickly involved into yet another discussion about Trump. I believe if you look, you may see that there are already threats in which to bash Trump.

Can’t say I’ve seen any Democrats…Black or White, “supporting“ Fani’s “sexual immorality” either. If that is the only requirement, what is the point of this thread?

I only asked if any black posters here agreed with Willis that she should be held to a different standard due to the fact that she is a black woman?

Apparently though, Trump’s immorality is not enough to stop supporters from supporting

Not when so many of his opponents are also sexually immoral, but he is so much better for the country. As almost always, with American politics, it’s a choice between the lesser of two evils. If you know of a candidate running this year, who has no accusations of sexual perversity and disgusting behavior, please name them. Meaning a serious candidate, of course.

him which makes implications that there is some sort of racial aspect to morality questionable.

I will never tire of repeating that it was Miss Willis herself, who brought up the racial aspect.

So why are you starting a thread based on utilizing double standards?

I started the thread to ask about the double standard, that Fanny Willis proposed.

She has enough to go to trial, it is a serious case, and it began before he announced he was running again.

Agree to disagree.

Ate you trying to claim that if someone decides to run for office, they are immune from criminal prosecution of any kind? That’s a new one. I do believe we have had candidates running for an office while being investigated for corruption right? Why is Trump different?

No, but when someone is the front Runner and presumed Victor in the upcoming presidential election, I think prosecutors should be very careful about trying to block or overturn the will of the voters.

And, specifically, how does any of this have a bearing on the merits of the case itself? It really doesn’t, it just affects HER credibility and could well require a new prosecutor to lead it.

Her extreme dishonesty makes it questionable whether the case should have ever been brought. I’m sure you know that the indictment brought about nothing more than Miss Willis presentation to a grand jury. With such a one-sided proceeding, it is very important that the prosecutor be a person of utmost integrity. Clearly, that was fallen far short of in this case.

The only thing that requires a higher standard is her job, not her case. It is no different than any judicial position where even the appearance of impropriety should be avoided (Clarence Thomas*cough*)

Clarence Thomas appearance of propriety was entirely manufactured by one witness, and a gaggle of Democratic senators, willing to give her airtime. Unlike Donald Trump, Clarence Thomas had exactly 0 other women come out of the woodwork, claiming he had mistreated them as he supposedly mistreated Anita Hill.

Her sex life is no one’s business, and especially not the business of a Trump supporter who gives the man occupying the highest office in the land a free pass on it while condemning her.

I think when her sex life involves a prosecutor that she hired using taxpayer funds, it becomes everybody’s business. Don’t like it, don’t hire your adulterous lover for such an extremely lucrative job at everybodr’s expense.

Now the financial chicanery is a whole ‘nother matter and that could be serious, not the affair which your OP focuses on.

Focus on the affair. However, Miss Willis was not specific in her statement that she was not to be held to a standard of perfection since she was a black woman. For all I know, she may have met the financial dealings, now that you mention it.

Either way, I suppose I will never get a serious answer to that serious question of whether other posters believe that she should be held to a different standard because she has a black woman.

 

[Coyote]

Of course, I knew this thread would quickly involved into yet another discussion about Trump. I believe if you look, you may see that there are already threats to bash Trump.

I only asked if any black posters here agreed with Willis that she should be held to a different standard due to the fact that she is a black woman?

Not win so many of his opponents are also sexually immoral, but he is so much better for the country. As almost always, with American politics, it’s a choice between the lesser of two evils. If you know of a candidate running this year, who has no accusations of sexual perversity and disgusting behavior, please name them. Meaning a serious candidate, of course.

I will never tear over, repeating that it was Miss Willis herself, who brought up the racial aspect.

I started the thread to ask about the double standard, that Fanny Willis proposed.

Agree to dis

No, but when someone is the front Runner at presume Victor in the upcoming presidential election, I think prosecutors should be very careful about trying to overturn the will of the voters.

Her extreme dishonesty makes it questionable whether the case should have ever been brought. I’m sure you know that the indictment brought about nothing more than Miss Willis presentation to a grand jury. Was such a one-sided proceeding, it is very important that the prosecutor be a person of utmost integrity. Clearly, that was fallen far short of in this case.

Clarence Thomas appearance of propriety was an entirely manufactured by one witness, and a gaggle of Democratic senators, willing to give her airtime. Unlike Donald Trump, Clarence Thomas had exactly 0 other women come out of the woodwork, claiming he had mistreated them as he supposedly mistreated I need a hill. You know who I mean spellcheck did that not me

I think when her sex life involves a prosecutor that she hired using taxpayer funds, it becomes everybody’s business. Don’t like it, don’t hire your adulterous lover for such a extremely lucrative job at tax fair expense.

Focus on the affair. However, Miss Willis was not specific in her statement that she was not to be held to a standard of perfection since she was a black woman. For all I know, she may have met the financial dealings, now that you mention it.

Either way, I suppose I will never get a serious answer to that serious question of whether other posters believe that she should be held to a different standard because she has a black woman.

The actual double standard is not the one you are proposing. It is the fact that you are holding her to a different standard than you do White men. You can say you aren’t but when you support one of the most flagrant abusers ethics, morality and marital fidelity, it weakens your argument.

Personally, I am disappointed and more concerned about the hiring and the financial aspects of this than I am over her having sex with a man who‘s marriage was long over already when she met him and that you are now trying to portray her as a marriage wrecker.

If you support one person, despite the fact he is immoral and then condemn another for what is notably a lesser offense, then then I have to say…is this a double standard because she is a woman (thinking back to the way Kamala Harris was treated as well compared to men).

 

[Coyote]

No, but when someone is the front Runner and presumed Victor in the upcoming presidential election, I think prosecutors should be very careful about trying to block or overturn the will of the voters.

So….where do you draw your ethical line here because you are proposing two justice systems: one for politicians and one for the rest of us.

In the case against Trump, this was initiated BEFORE he announced any candidacy. So….how can I get off Scott free?

When I announce I’m running for….dog catcher, governor, senate, president?

When I’ve gained enough support to be a serious contender?

(Hmmm….Why wasn’t Santos given a free pass for transgressions then?)

Or…is it just when my name happens to be Trump and the prosecutor is a woman accused of Navi g an affair?

This is importsant, I’m planning my pre-electoral criminal career and want to make sure I get the timing of it right.

Her extreme dishonesty makes it questionable whether the case should have ever been brought. I’m sure you know that the indictment brought about nothing more than Miss Willis presentation to a grand jury. With such a one-sided proceeding, it is very important that the prosecutor be a person of utmost integrity. Clearly, that was fallen far short of in this case.

Clarence Thomas appearance of propriety was entirely manufactured by one witness, and a gaggle of Democratic senators, willing to give her airtime. Unlike Donald Trump, Clarence Thomas had exactly 0 other women come out of the woodwork, claiming he had mistreated them as he supposedly mistreated Anita Hill.

I am not thinking of Hill but much more recent activities.

I think when her sex life involves a prosecutor that she hired using taxpayer funds, it becomes everybody’s business. Don’t like it, don’t hire your adulterous lover for such an extremely lucrative job at everybodr’s expense.

I agree. But isn’t the thrust of your OP. It was attempting to create a racial angle on ”morality” and a double standard foe women when comes to affairs.

Focus on the affair. However, Miss Willis was not specific in her statement that she was not to be held to a standard of perfection since she was a black woman. For all I know, she may have met the financial dealings, now that you mention it.

She should be held to the same standard as Trump.

Either way, I suppose I will never get a serious answer to that serious question of whether other posters believe that she should be held to a different standard because she has a black woman.

You are basically admitting that this is a bait thread .

 

[Seymour Flops]

The actual double standard is not the one you are proposing.

This is the part that I don’t understand, Koyote. You are smart person, I know that. Yet no matter how many times I point out that it was funny Willis who proposed this double standard that I’m asking about, you still keep coming back to that it is I Seymour Flops proposing this double standard.

Why is that? If I copy and paste your statement a couple of more times would that do it?

It is the fact that you are holding her to a different standard than you do White men. You can say you aren’t but when you support one of the most flagrant abusers ethics, morality and marital fidelity, it weakens your argument.

If it’s all racial, that is my own racism, why did I support Clarence Thomas when he was also accused?

The same three reasons that I support Trump:

One the evidence is insufficient.

Two person supported supports my political values.

Three there is no accusation that any alleged sexual misconduct was directly related to their jobs as public servants.

That makes their cases different from a woman who deliberately hired with taxpayer funds, her adulterous lover, so that they could be close during the day and have plenty of money to spend on vacations.

Personally, I am disappointed and more concerned about the hiring and the financial aspects of this than I am over her having sex with a man who‘s marriage was long over already when she met him and that you are now trying to portray her as a marriage wrecker.

The idea that “the marriage was basically over “is the perpetual excuse of every adulterous person who is ever called on it. Of course a man who wants to get some as side sex is going to say that his marriage is basically over. That doesn’t make it true.

If you support one person, despite the fact he is immoral and then condemn another for what is notably a lesser offense, then then I have to say…is this a double standard because she is a woman (thinking back to the way Kamala Harris was treated as well compared to men).

I explained that a couple of times already, and you keep ignoring my explanations. I’m not a genius, but I know when I’m wasting my breath.

 

[Seymour Flops]

So….where do you draw your ethical line here because you are proposing two justice systems: one for politicians and one for the rest of us.

In the case against Trump, this was initiated BEFORE he announced any candidacy. So….how can I get off Scott free?

When I announce I’m running for….dog catcher, governor, senate, president?

When I’ve gained enough support to be a serious contender?

You seriously got all that out “should be very careful about blocking or overturning. The will of the people?“

I find it hard to believe that you really got all that out of what I said. It sounds more like you’re arguing against the imaginary arguments, you attribute to people who disagree with you.

(Hmmm….Why wasn’t Santos given a free pass for transgressions then?)

He was unfortunately. For a long time anyway. I excoriated my fellow Republicans for continuing support that fraud just to hold onto the seat.

Or…is it just when my name happens to be Trump and the prosecutor is a woman accused of Navi g an affair?

This is importsant, I’m planning my pre-electoral criminal career and want to make sure I get the timing of it right.

Since you will be a Democrat, I doubt it will become an issue for you. Republican prosecutors have not yet picked up the Democrats technique of arresting and prosecuting people who are on the verge of defeating their candidate and an election.

I honestly hope that they don’t. I would prefer to see the Democrats realize they need to stop that nonsense. But even if they don’t, I’d rather have one party stay honest and be in sharp contrast to the other party, who is emulating the governments of Venezuela, North Korea, and the former Soviet union.

And before you go on again about how Trump hadn’t announced yet, there was no question about Trump running. Everyone knew he was going to run.

Even if they weren’t 100% sure, the Democrats had plenty of incentive to try to make sure that he could not run. It hasn’t worked, hence all the fury and anger.

I am not thinking of Hill but much more recent activities.




I agree. But isn’t the thrust of your OP. It was attempting to create a racial angle on ”morality” and a double standard foe women when comes to affairs.

No.

Again… It was asking about Fannie Willis’s race based double standard. Here it is again:

Fani Willis: “you cannot expect black women to be perfect and save the world.“

She should be held to the same standard as Trump.


You are basically admitting that this is a bait thread .

An OP with a question that makes some posters uncomfortable is a “bait thread?”

No.

Not unless that applies to opening posters of all political persuasions.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Well it is obvious now where she got her lying from.
Damn - her Dad is the worst and most obvious liar I have seen in a while.
This story of how white businesses wouldn't take his credit cards, refused his service till he paid in cash.
FFS.... really? And him being a lawyer??? He would have sued their pants off and everyone knows it!

"It's a black thing"... insinuating that, for black people, they need to have cash because... racism.


Holy cow

 

[Lisa558]

Well it is obvious now where she got her lying from.
Damn - her Dad is the worst and most obvious liar I have seen in a while.
This story of how white businesses wouldn't take his credit cards, refused his service till he paid in cash.
FFS.... really? And him being a lawyer??? He would have sued their pants off and everyone knows it!

"It's a black thing"... insinuating that, for black people, they need to have cash because... racism.


Holy cow

He was a Black Panther. Full of anger and hate for whites.