Fani Willis can remain on Trump Georgia case if special prosecutor steps aside

[ificandream]

Last edited Fri Mar 15, 2024, 12:41 PM - Edit history (6)

Source: Washington Post (gift article/no paywall)

ATLANTA -- The judge overseeing the Georgia election interference case against former president Donald Trump and his allies rejected an effort to disqualify Fulton County District Attorney Fani T. Willis (D) from the case over a romantic relationship she had with the lead prosecutor she appointed.

In a 23-page ruling issued Friday, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee wrote that defendants "failed to meet their burden" in proving Willis's relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade was a "conflict of interest" enough to merit her removal from the case. But the judge also found an appearance of "impropriety" and said either Willis and her office must fully leave the case or Wade must withdraw from the proceeding.

(snip)

McAfee's order is a significant legal victory for Willis, who maintains control of the historic criminal case against the former president and his allies that she began investigating more than three years ago. But the tawdry diversion has come at a personal and professional cost to Willis, as embarrassing details of her personal life and romantic relationships have come under scrutiny inside the same courtroom where she had hoped to put Trump and his co-defendants on trial this August.

(snip)

But even allies of Willis fear the case against Trump could be irreparably damaged, with Willis's actions having undermined public confidence in the prosecution. And the tawdry claims against Willis are unlikely to go away -- especially in the public realm where she has already faced political attacks from Trump and his supporters, racist criticism and threats from those opposed to her prosecution of the former president.

Read more: https://wapo.st/43gqB13

---

From the judge's ruling:

Ultimately, dismissal of the indictment is not the appropriate remedy to adequately dissipate the financial cloud of impropriety and potential untruthfulness found here. See Olsen v.State,302 Ga.288,294 (2017) (Dismissalofanindictment is an extreme sanction, used only sparingly as a remedy for unlawful government conduct. )(quoting State v. Lampl,296 Ga.892,896 (2015)). There has not been a showing that the Defendants due process rights have been violated or that the issues involved prejudiced the Defendants in any way. Nor is disqualification of a constitutional officer necessary when a less drastic and sufficiently remedial option is available. The Court therefore concludes that the prosecution of this case cannot proceed until the State selects one of two options.The District Attorney may choose to step aside,along with the whole ofher office, and refer the prosecution to the Prosecuting Attorney's Council for reassignment.See O.C.G.A. 15-18-5. Alternatively, SADA Wade can withdraw, allowing the District Attorney, the Defendants, and the public to move forward without his presence or remuneration distracting from and potentially compromising the merits of this case.

You can find the entire ruling here: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/03/15/us/judge-s-decision-on-disqualification-in-the-trump-case.html

Further reading: How Fani Willis' Donald Trump Case Changes Without Nathan Wade (Newsweek)
]
Further reading: Fani Willis Threatened Nathan Wade's Wife, New Ethics Complaint Alleges

Further reading:
Fani Willis Actions 'Wasted' Time in Donald Trump Case--George Conway

[Climate Crusader]

1. Find and hire a MONSTER prosecutor...

...and take a back seat, though still visible.

Let's get the focus back where it belongs.

[Kennah]

32. Please hire a black woman. Please hire a black woman. Please hire a black woman.

[Climate Crusader]

43. As long as whoever is hired is a beast, I'm down.

I'd just like to get the focus back where it belongs- on Trump!!!

[iluvtennis]

63. Ms Willis is a MONSTER prosecutor...but thinking about your post, I agree she should take a back seat

and let someone else lead.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

2. Got that ruling right here:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24482779-order-on-defendants-motions-to-dismiss-and-disqualify-the-fulton-county-district-attorney

Hat tip, CNN

READ: Fulton County judge’s decision allowing Fani Willis to continue prosecuting 2020 election interference case

By CNN staff
1 minute read
Updated 9:22 AM EDT, Fri March 15, 2024

(CNN) — Judge Scott McAfee ruled on Friday that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis can stay on and prosecute the Georgia 2020 election interference racketeering case against former President Donald Trump and 14 of his co-defendants.

McAfee said, however, that Willis would have to remove special prosecutor Nathan Wade from the case in order for her and her office to remain.

Read McAfee’s decision here:

{snip}

The judge didn't waste any time, did he?

And good morning.

[moniss]

18. Two weeks to issue

a plain ruling he could have made from the bench the day the hearing ended. Nothing complicated about the ruling. So Judge you feel there is an "appearance" problem with both of them on the case. But it takes you two weeks to figure out that removing one removes the appearance? Sure thing judge. God forbid anything really complicated in this trial comes up. You'll have us waiting 30 years for a decision.

[Martin68]

30. Even a perception of conflict of interest has to be taken seriously to avoid successful appeals. Good ruling.

If hastily issued it would have also been possible grounds for appeal. Justice does not and should not proceed at internet speed.

[moniss]

44. It's not a matter of internet speed

but even "I Lean" ruled from the bench immediately on the dismissal motion in Florida. I see nothing in the decision that is groundbreaking legal reasoning about an appearance and how to correct it. That is a mostly boilerplate matter and most law clerks should be able to hammer that together in a day or two at the very most. Not 2 weeks. We've just spent 10 weeks on this from the time of accusation to this. The trial at hand won't likely be that long. If it ever happens because Georgia just signed their shiny new "persecute the prosecutor" law and there is no doubt they will be itching to use it.

The more that judges entertain delays the more delays will beget delays. It's what happens. I refer people to the Blue Cross/Blue Shield current class action case as an example. The parties reached a settlement several years ago but the courts have entertained endless filings and even allowed a case against the settlement to be heard and appealed that was filed by a non-party to the suit based on the idea that "maybe this case settlement", "might impact them", "maybe in some way", "maybe at some date in the future" and therefore they should be able to litigate against the parties in the underlying case. So the judge entertained a hypothetical bootstrap to a hypothetical bootstrap to drag a case on for years. And it's not over yet because for the next few months we are still in the appeal filing window for the latest loss by the bootstrapping litigant. The underlying case was filed in 2012. After 8 years of litigation the parties agreed to a settlement. Since 2020 that settlement then was beaten around by the judge and others until finally in 2022 the judge relented and approved the settlement but of course the hypothetical bootstrapper may go on and on and any actual reimbursement to policyholders is not likely before 2025/2026.

[Martin68]

47. I thought they were examining evidence to determine whether an affair took place, when it started, and how

deeply the two parties were involved, as well as whether there were any quid pro quos involved in the course of the relationship. How is that a "boilerplate matter?"

[moniss]

60. The decision is boilerplate

not the hearing. Boilerplate always refers to the written decision. You don't say a particular event or strategy is "boilerplate". That is when something is called "textbook" if it follows a classic well known track. Boilerplate is the kind of standard phrasing and paragraphs you find in contracts etc. and in very common judicial decisions about very common things. Like an appearance of conflict.

[Martin68]

85. I'm afraid you misunderstood my point. I know exactly what boilerplate means. You were responding to a comment I made

regarding the reason it took two weeks to come to a decision. During those two weeks the investigation took place. I was responding to a comment complaining about the length of time it took to rule on the issue. I was explaining why its took two weeks to reach a decision. I'm not sure why you focused on the boilerplate decision that was issued after the investigation.

[moniss]

86. I'm not talking about

the investigation. I'm talking about the decision. As I said it was something, especially based on the ability to grab boilerplate text from prior case law, that should take no more than a couple of days. You felt it needed two weeks for apparently your idea that some deep legal thinking had to consult the Ghost of Clarence Darrow in order to arrive at a decision.

But as I said to you in an additional comment it turns out you were incorrect. Apparently you did not see the news item from yesterday that, in fact, the decision was ready in a couple of days but was held back while security threats were addressed. I have no idea where you get that the investigation was only 2 weeks. The investigation of the matter by the parties took place prior to the hearing and continued through the hearing. All of that was longer than two weeks.

[Martin68]

87. I hand't seen that additional information when I wrote my post.

[PortTack]

51. Agree...stop the frump lovers from flapping their jaws...at least for now.

[moniss]

80. So I guess now that it comes out that

he did in fact have the decision ready within a couple of days means it could be done as I said. The delay had nothing to do with not being hasty and being overturned on appeal.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

3. "Impropriety"? "Irreparably damaged"? Bull SHIT! Prosecute the criminals, Willis.

Fani Willis did not commit crimes against the voters of Georgia or of the nation. traitortrump and his co-conspirators did.

It is just plain stupid to allow appearances to interfere with stopping criminals.

[republianmushroom]

24. Totally agree.

Willis relationship has nothing to do with the evidence of the trial.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

26. I guess we ought to be thankful that the judge didn't say she should smile more.

[spooky3]

33. Although he did say her behavior on the stand

Was “unprofessional.” So, if you show anger at being falsely accused, you’re too “uppity.”

[BumRushDaShow]

4. Well the decision seems easy, although AP did a doozy of a headline

Fulton County DA Fani Willis must step aside or remove special prosecutor in Trump case, judge says

Updated 9:35 AM EDT, March 15, 2024

ATLANTA (AP) — Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis must step aside from the Georgia election interference case against Donald Trump or remove the special prosecutor with whom she had a romantic relationship before the case can proceed, the judge overseeing it ruled Friday.

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee did not find that Willis’ relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade amounted to a conflict of interest that should disqualify her from the case. However, he said, the allegations created an “appearance of impropriety” that infected the prosecution team.

“As the case moves forward, reasonable members of the public could easily be left to wonder whether the financial exchanges have continued resulting in some form of benefit to the District Attorney, or even whether the romantic relationship has resumed,” the judge wrote.

“Put differently, an outsider could reasonably think that the District Attorney is not exercising her independent professional judgment totally free of any compromising influences. As long as Wade remains on the case, this unnecessary perception will persist.”

(snip)

https://apnews.com/article/georgia-election-indictment-fani-willis-trump-60b7dd9642fc9ef7c03d75980692334c

[Fiendish Thingy]

14. The ruling makes perfect sense to me

And this conclusion, including the delay, is one Willis should have anticipated when making here decision to hire Wade.

[BumRushDaShow]

16. IIRC, he is an outside "contractor" as it is

And because of all the defendants (at this point 15 still active with 4 plea deals), this would probably be the last case to be resolved (and they will probably go for more plea deals for the lesser characters).

[ananda]

19. Agree. I like this decision.

Now, let the proceedings... proceed.

[sybylla]

20. You mean her decision to have a relationship with a consenting adult?

Because there's no evidence it happened the other way around. That's a Trump talking point, and if it's being parroted here, I guess they won.

[bottomofthehill]

31. A consenting adult who is on her payroll ....really, you should not be sleeping with a subordinate.......

and paid at a higher rate than state employees. Unforced error, get rid of the boyfriend and move on.

[people]

36. Special prosecutor was not on a higher pay rate

Testimony was that Wade was paid at the same rate as other prosecutors working on this case.

[bottomofthehill]

62. we was being paid $250.00 an hour that would be $500,000 a year, staff lawyers make $175,000

The other staff lawyers in Willis' office make up to $175,000 a year, while Wade has made more than $700,000 since November 2021 while being allowed to keep his private practice. The staff lawyers are not allowed to work in private practice.

https://www.newsweek.com/fani-willis-allowed-nathan-wade-salary-perks-attorney-says-1876584

[SunSeeker]

69. Wade was getting paid the same hourly rate as the other two special prosecutors contracted for this case.

Last edited Fri Mar 15, 2024, 06:59 PM - Edit history (1)

Please stop with the right wing talking points.

He and the other two special prosecutors are not staff lawyers. They're independent contractors, paid by the hour. Staff lawyers are paid a yearly salary, and receive health benefits and a pension.

[NanaCat]

72. Some people just can't stand it that a black woman

Is in charge and has a sex life.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

27. Yeah, little missy shouldn't be so uppity in her high and mighty independence.

The ruling smells like shit.

[Fiendish Thingy]

41. You're clearly not familiar with common ethics rules regarding workplace relationships. Nt

[Hermit-The-Prog]

48. What law did she break? What rights of the defendants were diminished?

What ethics rules did she violate? Where is the harassment? How does her activity unfairly disadvantage the defendants?

[Fiendish Thingy]

50. "It's not illegal!" Is the weakest of defences.

If you’re not already familiar with the ethics of workplace relationships, especially between supervisors and employees/hires, including contractors, I’m not going to provide a primer on that here.

This is not some unique, made-up-on-the-spot issue (although Roman’s motivation was clearly to avoid prosecution for he and his co-defendants), it is a common issue in both corporate and government work environments, with strict regulations and policies in place in most settings.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

52. You failed to answer a single question. This is not sexual harassment.

[Fiendish Thingy]

67. Who said it was?

Relationships between supervisors and hires encompass ethical issues including financial(especially in the case of taxpayer/shareholder money), power dynamics, favouritism,
and in some cases sexual harassment.

It astonishes me that, even today in the 21st century, there are large numbers of people unaware of all the ethical implications of relationships between supervisors and the people they hire.

[SunSeeker]

70. Willis was not his "supervisor." Wade is an independent contractor.

By definition, an independent contractor is NOT an employee and has no supervisor. He was not her "subordinate." They were co-counsel. He, and the other two special prosecutors and Willis, all had the same power to prosecute the case. Willis did not "hire" him, he contracted with the county.

When you call a plumber, you don't tell him how to fix a leak, you just say you want the leak fixed. You are not hiring an employee, you are contracting with an independent contractor.

It astonishes me that, even today in the 21st century, there are large numbers of people unaware of the differences between an employee and an independent contractor.

[Fiendish Thingy]

74. False

She hired him, and she could fire him, just as you could fire a plumber whose work you weren’t satisfied with. She is the head of the department in charge of prosecuting this case.

You are splitting hairs to suit your own bias, rather than acknowledging the ethical conflicts that exist.

[SunSeeker]

77. No, what you said is false. Willis did not hire him.

The county contracted with him. That is not "splitting hairs." That has legal consequences to what sort of work relationship it is.

[NanaCat]

73. Sexual harassment is not the standard

Employers sleeping with employees or contractors is the issue. It isn't merely about sexual harassment but about relationships between employers and employees creating the potential for abuses like favoritism. That's why many workplaces these days prohibit intimate relationships with anyone working in the same company or agency. I know some of the LEO-oriented federal agencies do not allow fraternization between employees at all, never mind between employees and management.

This has been policy since the 90s. Back then, I worked in a federal agency where a manager had a relationship with an employee. He got transferred after several employees filed legitimate complaints that he gave his girlfriend privileges that other employees didn't get, that he gave her easier tasks or gave her first shot at plum assignments ahead of more experienced or senior employees. He was lucky not to get fired.

That's a prime example of how these relationships create conflict in the workplace, and what employers are trying to avoid.

[spooky3]

59. There are policies but many do NOT strictly forbid workplace

Romances.

[Fiendish Thingy]

65. I don't know where you have worked

But every place I’ve worked, from government, to private nonprofit to retail back in the 70’s had rules and policies around relationships between supervisors and the people they hire.

[spooky3]

66. I was a management professor who did research on the topic

For more than 40 years. You can find examples of these policies on the web—see SHRM.org for example.

[Fiendish Thingy]

68. Then surely you are aware of the standards that exist around relationships between supervisors and hires.

Not just “workplace romances”, but relationships between bosses and the people they hire and supervise.

Every place I’ve worked, if a supervisor and someone they supervised started a relationship, it was always an HR issue, and usually resulted in one of the parties being transferred so that the supervisor was no longer overseeing the work of the employee.

Things got tricky when two equal employees in a relationship, and one of them was up for a promotion that would make them the supervisor of the other. It could block a promotion and/or result in the transfer of one of them.

[SunSeeker]

71. Surely you are aware of the difference between employees and independent contractors.

Wade could not be "up for a promotion." He was not an employee. Willis was not his supervisor. As an independent contractor, by definition, he had no supervisor. He had a contract with the county to prosecute this case.

[Fiendish Thingy]

75. Willis was indeed his supervisor

She hired him, and could fire him, and, as the DA in charge of prosecuting this case, she supervised his work.

The primary difference between employee and contractor is for taxes, benefits and liabilities under worker’s comp and unemployment insurance. The ethical issues don’t change just because of some legal hair splitting over whether a 1099 or W-2 is issued.

[SunSeeker]

76. No, she was not.

She recruited him, she did not hire him. He was contracted by the county to prosecute the case. And once he signed the contract with the county, she could not arbitrarily terminate the contract or "fire" him.

The primary difference between employee and independent contractor is NOT "taxes, benefits..." Whether a person is an employee or independent contractor depends on who controls the person's work. Generally speaking, the difference between independent contractors and employees is whether or not the entity paying for services has the right to control or direct the manner and means of work.

Neither Willis, nor the county who paid him, told him how to be a prosecutor. He shepherded the case through the grand jury process, and did a damn good job.

[LiberalFighter]

5. The judge needs to be investigated.

[prodigitalson]

11. for what?

[jimfields33]

40. For making the correct ruling? Weird.

[SunSeeker]

79. Georgia law only requires disqualification of a DA upon proof of a financial conflict of interest.

The only applicable ethical bar in Georgia was a FINANCIAL conflict of interest. That is why the defendant tried to shoehorn the conflict claim into that rule with the ridiculous claim that Willis was financially benefitting from the Wade relationship.

This judge created new Georgia law by saying a romantic relationship, even though over, and even though it did not involve a financial interest, let alone a financial conflict of interest, created an "appearance of impropriety" sufficient to disqualify a DA.

[nickster48]

6. Oh I love this......!

Hand him his ass Fani…..!

[Prairie_Seagull]

7. Seems to me this is an acceptable ruling.

Middle of the road with the appearance of fairness. I have yet to read the ruling and so far, I, being nothing more than an onlooker find this OK.

What effects it could have moving forward I have to leave to others.

[SKKY]

8. Thank god! This is a huge win for justice...

...and I think the judge threaded the needle as best he could. This is clearly the most important case TFG faces, and now hopefully the facts will come to light. And right during an election year. Color me optimistic.

[ificandream]

12. I think the documents case is the most important.

Granted they tried to overturn the election in Georgia, but the implications for national security at the open doors of Mar-A-Lago are frightening. Just who all had access to them in that loose setting?

[BumRushDaShow]

17. The federal case is definitely important

but is also one that can get federal pardons. Smith tried to streamline it as much as possible to make it open and shut.

The state case wouldn't be eligible for any federal pardons (although I suppose they could go through that process for state clemency that would require a 5-year wait and a request to a board - ASSUMING the RW legislature doesn't somehow change that process, ex post facto, to make it easier for 45).

[BlueKota]

55. I should know this as a historian who took a

lot of political science courses, but the bout with meningitis did some damage to my memory. Since this is a state case can he still appeal it to the USSC or not?

[BumRushDaShow]

56. The only way they can appeal to a federal court

is if they can show the state laws are somehow in violation of federal/Constitutional statutes and in general, the SCOTUS has stayed out of "state laws and politics" unless they violate the U.S. Constitution.

[BlueKota]

58. Thank you!

[BumRushDaShow]

61. Most welcome!

[SKKY]

81. Let me be clear, I think they're all important, for sure...

....but the Atlanta case is the one that is the most open and shut, which in my mind makes it the most important. I mean, they've got his voice on a freaking call!!!

[neohippie]

9. I don't agree with the ruling but think the case needs to move on

Just because the grossly distorted claims by the defense were spread falsely to create the appearance of impropriety and then were amplified by the media. In court they were not proven from what I saw by the lawyers arguments

The appearance of impropriety is not the same as actual impropriety, especially when given the opportunity in a hearing they couldn't prove anything that they claimed, in my opinion, yet the judge orders the prosecutorial team to suffer from these circumstances for what specific actions that were demonstrated as wrong? This is like giving everyone a participation trophy, even the losers

This whole attacking the prosecutors, personal relationships that created no conflicts of interest nor change the actual crimes that were committed by the defendants that allowed them to put the prosecution on trial was a farce

[Hassin Bin Sober]

21. Yep. The ruling is unnecessary baby splitting just for the sake of baby splitting. But it is what it is.

The hearing should have been short and sweet - the judge could have taken the trump/defense claims at face value and ruled that being a couple and going on vacations together has no basis in law to require removal of a prosecutor.

The rest was all an attempt at throwing sand in the face of justice on the part of well financed CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS and the judge should have shut it down.

[ripcord]

37. The appearance of impropriety is important

That is why nepotism laws were changed after JFK named Bobby AG.

[Fiendish Thingy]

13. So, this delay could have been avoided if she hadn't hired him in the first place

Which is what I’ve said all along.

It didn’t have to be this way.

[berksdem]

15. Exactly!

glad she is allowed to continue but this was just poor judgement on FW's part.

Now go get the bloated bastard!

[sybylla]

22. A) Besides Trump talking points, where's the evidence

that the relationship began before she hired him?

B) She testified that she spent months looking for people to assist in this prosecution before hiring Wade. I assume her office has the receipts on that as well.

I mean, if we're going to spout Trump talking points, I guess his work here is done. He managed to shame a Black DA and get her thrown under the bus.

[Fiendish Thingy]

23. Before/After Doesn't matter

Although I believe there was testimony that the relationship happened before he was hired.

But it doesn’t matter.

It is common ethical best practice that supervisors don’t date employees (spare me the hair splitting “he was an independent contractor”).

Willis should have known this was a potential landmine in the most important case her office has ever handled.

It didn’t have to be this way.

[sybylla]

28. Before/after does matter because it shows

intentional disregard if it was before.

Been watching lots of podcasts/substacks and more from legal eagles like Legal AF, Kirschner, et al, and they all see this as an unwarranted sideshow attacking and shaming a Black DA.

I'm afraid I'm taking their word over yours.

[elleng]

46. Sounds right to me, SIDESHOW.

[spooky3]

35. There was discredited testimony.

The former “friend” was actually a former employee who was fired for cause. She had an ax to grind, and no concrete proof of the beginning of the relationship.

On the stand, Wade’s former attorney admitted openly that he did not know when the relationship began.

[MichMan]

53. Fani should charge both of them with perjury and prosecute to the fullest extent of the law

[spooky3]

57. I would guess she wants to move on, with her eyes on the prize

Of convicting Smelvis.

[Silent Type]

25. Mess could have been avoided if one of them stepped down when this frist broke.

[orangecrush]

42. I agree

But it is what it is.

[SKKY]

83. Or, as a former Boss of mine used to say...

..."Never dip your pen in the company's ink." Sage counsel that.

[Joinfortmill]

29. If she's smart she'll allow another

Last edited Fri Mar 15, 2024, 11:51 AM - Edit history (1)

Prosecutor to do most of the questioning during trial and supervise as much as possible.

[DarthDem]

38. That is what DAs do

DAs do not, as a near-universal rule, prosecute cases themselves. They assign that work to deputies. That is what will happen here. Despite the predictable and uninformed media hand-wringing, this is a good ruling.

[TexasDem69]

34. This doesn't seem like a good look for the prosecutor

The court suggests they were less than truthful when they testified, and the ruling requires one of them to go. I suspect a lot of prosecutors might withdraw following this sort of ruling.

[MichMan]

54. There is no way Willis is going to withdraw

If anything she is now pissed off and will double down

[JudyM]

39. Are you watching, Clarence? Even the APPEARANCE of impropriety is a longstanding legal ethics standard.

Argue your facts if you think your behavior and failure to recuse is ok, but there’s a screamingly obvious appearance issue that demands you abide by this well-established legal ethical principle. You had to understand it to pass the bar, dammit. Your ethical professionalism is NONEXISTENT.

[elleng]

45. 'said either Willis and her office must fully leave the case or Wade must withdraw from the proceeding.'

I'm not sure this is reasonable. Don't wanna waste my time on a trivial matter, boyfriend/girlfriend b.s.

Good she's 'permitted' to remain on the case.

[Bayard]

49. Does this fall under the legal term of, "splitting the baby?"

Where neither side completely wins or loses?

I am very happy that DA Willis is still on the case.

[honest.abe]

64. Seems that way.

But this is good news I think.

[Socal31]

78. I don't like this.

This feels like the definition of a pyrrhic victory.

Anyone with a calendar and an understanding of what sort of tactics can be employed by sad Trumpet and his legal team would (or should) agree.

[Hikerchick57]

82. The judge went way beyond what he should have.

The judge set up Fani to be continually abused by TFG by going far beyond where he should have by suggesting other ways TFG can go after her. I’ve totally had it with these maggots!

[live love laugh]

84. This is a great loss of knowledge and expertise that will create delays or worse.

She’ll have to bring someone else up to speed. Finding trustworthy people is difficult.

I hope Fani takes this as the opportunity of a lifetime that it is and that she makes lemonade out of lemons. 🍋