Main image: Fulton County Superior Judge Scott McAfee speaks in court, Feb. 27, 2024, in Atlanta. (AP Photo/Brynn Anderson, Pool); Inset left: FILE – Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump speaks, March 9, 2024, in Rome, Ga. (AP Photo/Mike Stewart, File); Inset right: Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis looks on during a hearing on the Georgia election interference case, March, 1, 2024, in Atlanta. (AP Photo/Alex Slitz, Pool)
Hours after a Georgia judge partially granted a defense motion to disqualify Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from the racketeering (RICO) and election subversion case against Donald Trump, the lead prosecutor on the case stepped aside.
Nathan Wade was told that either him or Willis had to go.
“The District Attorney may choose to step aside, along with the whole of her office, and refer the prosecution to the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council for reassignment,” Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee wrote. “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.”
In the end, it was the contract attorney who fell on his sword – taking the issue of his romantic relationship with Willis, and his billable hours, outside of the purview of the trial court.
The relationship between the two prosecutors, and how they endeavored to explain it away after being found out, was a major issue for the court; but the judge suggested his hands were tied by precedent – casting an image of the state behaving badly but with minimal relevance to the case, and with little recourse for now.
“[T]he Court finds that the Defendants failed to meet their burden of proving that the District Attorney acquired an actual conflict of interest in this case through her personal relationship and recurring travels with her lead prosecutor,” wrote in the Friday morning order.
“[T]he established record now highlights a significant appearance of impropriety that infects the current structure of the prosecution team — an appearance that must be removed through the State’s selection of one of two options,” the court’s order continues. “The Defendants’ motions are therefore granted in part.”
McAfee denied “other alleged grounds for disqualification, including forensic misconduct.”
The forensic misconduct denial was related to the district attorney’s racially-charged Martin Luther King, Jr. Day speech at Big Bethel A.M.E. Church in Atlanta. While not disqualifying, McAfee says Willis’ comments during that lengthy speech were “improper.”
From the ruling:
However, the speech did not specifically mention any Defendant by name. Although not improvised or inadvertent, it also did not address the merits of the indicted offenses in an effort to move the trial itself to the court of public opinion. Nor did it disclose sensitive or confidential evidence yet to be revealed or admitted at trial. In addition, the case is too far removed from jury selection to establish a permanent taint of the jury pool. As best it can divine, under the sole direction of Williams, the Court cannot find that this speech crossed the line to the point where the Defendants have been denied the opportunity for a fundamentally fair trial, or that it requires the District Attorney’s disqualification. But it was still legally improper. Providing this type of public comment creates dangerous waters for the District Attorney to wade further into.
The ruling caps a three-month effort by the defense to have the district attorney and her office removed from the case over various misconduct allegations.
The court’s order will allow the case to move forward but the length of time spent dealing with the disqualification motion has been a substantial boon to the 45th president amid his multiple legal battles and the looming election rematch with President Joe Biden. A trial date in the matter is still possible but unlikely before November.
In the Jan. 8 motion to disqualify, co-defendant Michael Roman and his attorney, Ashleigh Merchant, alerted the world to the romance between Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade — along with allegations of nepotism and self-dealing. Roman was a senior staffer in Trump’s 2020 reelection campaign. Prosecutors allege he was part of the plot to send a slate of fake electors to vote for Trump.
The court’s decision hinged upon the legal standard of review applicable to disqualifying a prosecutor in Georgia. McAfee, during closing arguments, signaled the standard was likely to be dispositive.
The crux of the defense’s argument for removing Willis and Wade is that the district attorney hired her then-boyfriend for the job, overpaid him, and then reaped something akin to a financial windfall in the form of vacations, travel, lodging, and other such gifts. Those alleged gifts, the defense argued, were paid for with public funds.
Despite issuing a half-win for the nine co-defendants who moved to disqualify the prosecutors, the court did not find the evidence in the record was substantial enough to support those claims.
“[T]he Court finds, based largely on the District Attorney’s testimony, that the evidence demonstrated that the financial gain flowing from her relationship with Wade was not a motivating factor on the part of the District Attorney to indict and prosecute this case,” the order reads.
The defense also sought to dismiss the indictment in its entirety. That effort missed the mark entirely.
Trump’s lead attorney in Atlanta, Steve Sadow, suggested a defense appeal was likely come sooner than later.
“While respecting the Court’s decision, we believe that the it did not afford appropriate significance to the prosecutorial misconduct of Willis and Wade, including the financial benefits, testifying untruthfully about when their personal relationship began, as well as Willis’ extrajudicial MLK ‘church speech,’ where she played the race card and falsely accused the defendants and their counsel of racism,” Sadow said in a statement posted on X (formerly Twitter) after the ruling. “We will use all legal options available as we continue to fight to end this case, which should never have been brought in the first place.
Read McAfee’s ruling here.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
