Judge indicates he’ll rule soon on bid to remove Willis from Trump case
ATLANTA — The judge overseeing the Georgia election interference case against Donald Trump indicated Friday that he would rule within the next two weeks on whether to remove Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from the case over a romantic relationship with a top prosecutor.
After several days of extraordinary testimony, Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee heard arguments over whether Willis’ relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade amounts to a conflict of interest that should force them off one of four criminal cases against the former president.
Attorneys for Trump and his co-defendants accused Willis and Wade of lying on the witness stand about when their relationship began, and told McAfee that keeping the district attorney on the case threatens to undermine the public’s confidence in the hugely consequential prosecution.
“Think of the message that would be sent if they were not disqualified,” said Harry MacDougald, who represents former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark in the election case. “If this is tolerated, we will get more of it. This office is a global laughingstock because of their conduct.”
Willis’ office, meanwhile, said defendants have failed to provide any evidence of any financial benefit to Willis from the relationship, which she and Wade both say ended last summer. Adam Abbate, a prosecutor with the district attorney’s office, accused the defendants’ attorneys of pushing “speculation and conjecture” and trying to embarrass Willis with questions on the witness stand that have nothing to do with the issue at hand.
“It’s a desperate attempt to remove a prosecutor from a case for absolutely no reason, your honor, other than harassment and embarrassment,” Abbate said.
Willis walked into the hearing after attorneys for defendants in the election case wrapped up their arguments, and sat at a table where Wade and his attorney were also seated while listening to
Abbate make his case.
The legal arguments follow several days of hearings filled with salacious testimony that has created a soap opera atmosphere overshadowing the underlying charges accusing the former president of working to overturn his 2020 election loss in a desperate bid to cling to power. Willis and Wade were forced to answer uncomfortable questions on the witness stand about their sex life and romantic getaways, underscoring the extent to which the focus of the case has wandered from allegations of election interference to the prosecutors’ love lives.
Even if Willis fends off the disqualification effort, the allegations have threatened to taint the public’s perception of the prosecution as Trump and others seize on the relationship to try to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the case while the Republican presidential primary frontrunner vies to reclaim the White House.
Attorneys for the election case defendants say Willis paid Wade large sums for his work and then improperly benefited when he paid for vacations for the two of them.
Willis and Wade have acknowledged the relationship, but say it has no bearing on the case against Trump. The pair said they didn’t begin dating until the spring of 2022, after Wade was hired, and that they split travel expenses.
The hearings have at times wandered into surreal territory: Atlanta’s mayor watching from the gallery as a former Georgia governor testified, Willis’ father talking about keeping stashes of cash around the house and details of romantic getaways.
Willis’ removal would throw the most sprawling of the four criminal cases against Trump into question as the former president seeks a return to the White House. But it wouldn’t necessarily mean the charges against him and 14 others would be dropped.
If Willis and her office are disqualified, a nonpartisan council supporting prosecuting attorneys in Georgia would be tasked with finding a new attorney to take over. That person could either proceed with some or all of the charges against Trump and others, or drop the case altogether.
Even if a new lawyer moved forward on the path charted by Willis, the inevitable delay would seem likely to lessen the probability of the case getting to trial before November’s presidential election when Trump is expected to be the Republican nominee.
At a hearing preceding testimony, McAfee noted that under the law, “disqualification can occur if evidence is produced demonstrating an actual conflict or the appearance of one.” He said he wanted testimony to explore “whether a relationship existed, whether that relationship was romantic or non-romantic in nature, when it formed and whether it continues.”
Those questions were only relevant “in combination with the question of the existence and extent of any personal benefit conveyed as a result of the relationship,” McAfee said.