In a major way it doesn’t make sense to me. If Willis hired the special prosecutor because of a personal relationship, either he is the best possible candidate for the job anyhow, or he is not. If he is, then it doesn’t matter. If he isn’t, then the prosecution’s case will presumably be less skillfully managed and presented than it could otherwise be.
If I were rooting for the defense I’d be thinking, “yes please, bring it on!”
Saying that Trump is worse than Nixon is much like saying that colorectal cancer is worse than a common cold.
That’s a really good point, and I hadn’t thought of it that way.
I guess my perception is skewed, having been born and raised in Chicago where politicians, “don’t want nobody nobody sent.” And my long career as a fed employee/lawyer.
Anti-nepotism rules can seem foolish if you KNOW that someone you know is the best candidate for a position. But if you are going to be hiring/promoting a relative/friend, romantic partner, I think it behooves you to at least be entirely above-board about it up front, rather than having it brought out by an opponent at an inopportune time.
And sometimes - as unfair and inefficient as it might seem - even if you are convinced your spouse/child/lover is the best candidate, you ought to hire someone else - just for appearance’s sake. It would be an awfully rare case in which a person you have personal ties with is the ONLY qualified candidate. In many/most cases, it would be better to go with the 2d best candidate and avoid any appearance of impropriety.
I met my wife through work. Different departments that work closely together. Same with my prior boss, he met his wife through work. It’s a small county, that stuff happens a lot.
After 26 years, we still work for the same departments. It can be very beneficial in that I mostly know her job and she mine. Not that we could either do each others job, but, when you have a ‘what is this about’ question it helps.
We really don’t talk about work much at home, but having a person right there to answer a question is really nice.
I may be wrong, but I read that the relationship started after he was hired.
That was my recollection as well.
And mine.
OK. Not much different IMO. Yes, I know cow-orkers develop relationships often, but IMO, with such a high profile public job, and especially if one is a subordinate or a contractor I was responsible for hiring/paying, I’d EITHER try to keep my pants on until the contractor’s contract expired, the cow-orker found different employment, OR I’d be completely upfront with it with HR.
If you have not worked for the government - especially in a higher level legal job, you may not appreciate the ethical crap the keeps getting thrown at you. Hatch Act restrictions. Or outside work activity approval. I’m a lawyer, but I would need to get approval if a relative asks me to handle their closing on a house, or if I wanted to volunteer on my own time at a legal aid clinic. Every year I have to disclose my and my wife’s finances, as well as periodic transaction reports if we buy/sell throughout the year - even though I can’t really imagine what investments would create a conflict of interest for me.
Given that level of nitpicking, the idea that I ought to at least disclose that I’m boning someone my office is paying 100s of $1,000s does not strike me as untoward.
From what we know so far (subject to change, of course), I simply view this as an HR and PR problem.
Nothing more.
You are not wrong, it has been stated multiple times that the relationship started after Willis and Wade began working together.
Personally, I expect that to be ignored repeatedly by the rabid MAGA folks because it doesn’t really serve the narrative they are pushing.
I met my husband at work. Damn near everybody in the dealership was with someone else at the dealership. The handbook said those sort of relationships were frowned upon, but the owner always valued the employees too much to actually enforce it.
Relationships develop between people when you spend 8 plus hours a day with them.
This is another scandal fail, in my opinion.
I’m mildly surprised no one else thinks a different standard ought to apply for elected/government positions, than for private firms.
No, I don’t think it is a big deal. But I do think it suggests questionable judgment.
I agree completely. Nothing illegal or wrong (aside from the fact that the man in question was married to someone else at the time), but it inevitably would, and did, give MAGA a toe hold to scream about corruption and conflicts of interest. Though, to be fair, they don’t need a concrete reason to bleat and whine. But giving them the slightest crumb to point and and claim that it’s a mountain does nothing but help them make their “case”.
I don’t think it it wrong to have a relationship if your marriage has irretrievably and unambiguously broken down, as seems to be in this case.
However, if I was the defendant, I would think the situation a conflict of interest. Suppose discovery brings up information that might reasonably lead to the prosecution dropping my case (as it should because I’m innocent 
). The hiring prosecutor might hesitate to do that because it would lower her boyfriend’s income.
Then Georgia should change its regulations so this scenario will be clearly considered unethical next time.
That is a real stretch–especially since, IIRC, he was making more money before joining this case.
I don’t know why you suggest nobody else thinks that.
Thanks for pointing that out. My bad. I joined this thread late, and had not read back far/closely enough. My comment pertained to the responses following my post.
I don’t think conflict of interest should be measured by the amount of money involved. But since that may not be a popular opinion:
The New York Times says
Mr. Wade has earned more than $650,000 for his work for the D.A.’s office.
Quick googling fails to uncover what Wade used to make. But one web site says that the average salary for a lawyer in Georgia is around $103,750 per year. Of course there is a big range.
I also, back when I was a federal employee, had input to how much contractors I worked with would make, and to whether they would keep their job. And this relationship would have properly been seen as unethical. I don’t think I was being treated too strictly. After the Trump prosecution is over, Georgia should tighten up its rules.
P.S. What if I told my supervisor about the possible relationship before the first date, and he or she then took over making the contracting decisions? That would have been legal, but, realistically, if I am the one working closest with the contract employee, it would be hard for my supervisor to make independent judgments. So it would be legal, but not ideal. As here.
But is that what Mr. Wade earned personally, or is that what his law firm billed to Willis’s office? That’s a huge difference.
Also, “average salary for a lawyer” is misleading, as that number is probably very heavily weighted towards young associates. The more appropriate metric would be an “average compensation for a senior partner in a law firm”, which would be considerably higher.