Mediaboss Marketing

She is a local prosecutor who, while a Democrat, had little to do with the former president until he allegedly committed crimes in her jurisdiction. And her 2015 prosecution of a cheating scandal involving Atlanta teachers, a traditionally Democratic group, burnishes her nonpartisan prosecutorial credentials. Unlike federal prosecutors, she is unencumbered by Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel opinions on the powers of the presidency that can complicate charging current or former presidents.

None of this is to say that she will not encounter extreme scrutiny. Her every act will now be examined, as suggested by recent critical comments from a Georgia judge hearing a motion for her recusal from the Trump investigation. It was filed by a false elector, and several others later joined the motion, because of what we see as ethically permissible campaign activity by Ms. Willis. (The judge granted the motion as to the original petitioner, citing conflict of interest, but denied it to the others.) Still, she must proceed with extra care.

Her prosecutorial task will not be easy. When you charge a president, you need more than the standard proof beyond a reasonable doubt; you need proof way beyond a reasonable doubt. That is what the committee has helped deliver, producing a mountain of additional evidence that might have taken her years to gather if she could have gotten it at all.

Take the testimony by the former acting attorney general Jeffrey Rosen and other witnesses about Mr. Trumps attempt to hijack the Justice Department which included an effort by Jeffrey Clark to send a letter to state officials in states, including Georgia, that falsely claimed that the Justice Department had identified significant concerns that would affect the states election results.

Then there is the phony electors scheme. Here again, the committee came to Ms. Williss aid, obtaining testimony from Ronna Romney McDaniel, the chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, and others describing Mr. Trumps personal involvement in helping recruit false electors in states like Georgia. That testimony directly linked Mr. Trump to the conspiracy Ms. Willis may charge.

Any prosecution must consider intent, and the committee has secured proof of Mr. Trumps state of mind that might not have been otherwise available. Testimony from an array of witnesses especially those closest to Mr. Trump, like his former attorney general Bill Barr and his former White House counsel Pat Cipollone demonstrated that Mr. Trump was told that he had lost the election and, after Dec. 14, when the Electoral College cast its votes, that there was no legitimate legal basis to continue his attack.

Here is the original post:
Opinion | This Georgia Prosecutor Has Donald Trump in Her Sights, and Shes Not Stopping - The New York Times