Fox’s Dana Perino Defends Fani Willis’s ‘Restraint’ After Guest Slams ‘Massive’ Georgia Trump Indictment
On Friday, a report revealed that the grand jury who voted to indict former President Donald Trump and 18 co-defendants in Fulton County, Georgia wanted District Attorney Fani Willis to file charges against an even longer list of high-profile names. During Fox News’ America’s Newsroom, anchor Dana Perino pushed back against a guest who claimed her 98-page indictment was “unheard of.”
After talking to constitutional law expert Jonathan Turley about the latest development in the case of Trump’s alleged attempt to overturn the election results in Georgia, Fox hosts Bill Hemmer and Perino turned to Atlanta-based criminal defense attorney Phil Holloway, who believed that Willis played a larger part in the final decision on whom to indict:
The prosecutor controls everything. The prosecutor is their legal adviser, so to speak, and answers legal questions. And the prosecutor picks and chooses what witnesses to suggest they bring in.
Holloway agreed with Turley that the investigative grand jury was “out of control” in the charges and the naming of defendants, which they recommended include Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), former Sens. David Purdue (R-GA), and Kelly Loeffler (R-GA), pro-Trump lawyers Cleta Mitchell and Lin Wood, and former Trump National Security Advisor Mike Flynn. But Perino countered, saying that while Willis may have her critics, she evidently showed “restraint” in this case by not indicting those figures:
Perino: Phil, There are some critics of Fani Willis who say that she is looking to advance her career or she [has] got politics in mind. But did she show some restraint here?
Holloway: I think there was very little restraint shown, honestly, in this massive 98-page indictment. This is just unheard of. And it’s such a giant indictment that the courts are going to have a very difficult time digesting it. We’re starting to.
Perino: But she could have indicted people with bigger name recognition like a Senator Lindsey Graham or Michael Flynn. And she didn’t do that.
Holloway: Well, she would have had to, if she was going to indict, for example, a Lindsey Graham, she’s going to have to prove that he’s doing more than exercising his First Amendment rights to be suspicious and to voice those suspicions.
Perino: So. Exactly. So then why would the grand jury have said that we recommend he be indicted? And then she decides that “I can’t prove that in court,” so she’s not going to add them to the list.
Watch the video above via Fox News.
Have a tip we should know? email@example.com