Nathan Wade’s departure, announced hours after a Georgia judge’s ruling, means that DA Fani Willis can continue prosecuting the election case against Trump.
What to Know About the Decision
8 Hours ago
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee ruled on March 15 Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis does not need to step down from prosecuting the high-profile case against former President Donald Trump and 14 others if special counsel Nathan Wade is taken off the case.
The district attorney stepping aside would remove her entire office from the case, which would then need to wait for reassignment to another prosecutor. Mr. Wade is an outside attorney contracted by the office and his leaving the case would allow it to continue without any delay.
Texas AG Paxton Suggests ‘Rule of Law Means Nothing’ to Judge McAfee
By Sam Dorman 33 mins ago
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton lambasted the ruling and suggested that Judge Scott McAfee allowed the rule of law to “go by the wayside.”
“Today, the rule of law is completely going by the wayside and I think it really started under President Obama, and we’ve just moved to this place where now judges – and I deal with this, I know President Trump deals with this … the rule of law means nothing,” he told Blaze TV host Glenn Beck.
“They look at things politically, and they want a certain result, which is get rid of him so that he cannot be president—because they don’t feel like even with some potential voter fraud out there that they can beat him. And so, they are willing to ignore normal rules of procedure, normal rules of conflict, normal rule of law, to say the result matters here, let’s just keep on going.”
“It’s wrong, it’s unethical, and if our system of laws breaks down, we don’t have a constitutional republic.”
Mr. Paxton added that “we’re no different” than “Venezuela” because people are treated differently within the court system. He pointed to special counsel Robert Hur declining to prosecute President Joe Biden
More Action Needed, Says Trump Attorney
By Sam Dorman 41 mins ago
President Trump’s lead defense counsel Steve Sadow said Judge Scott McAfee’s ruling didn’t go far enough.
“While respecting the Court’s decision, we believe that 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,” Mr. Sadow said on X, formerly Twitter.
“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.”
Lawyer and TV personality Greta Van Susteren called on X for a special prosecutor to investigate whether Ms. Willis committed perjury. She added that “failure to do so says system is rigged.” In another post, she said: “The Governor needs to confront this – failure to do so shows a rogue system.”
Observers responded to Mr. Wade’s resignation by calling for additional action. “Now it is time for Fani to be DISBARRED and RESIGN!” Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) said.
Mr. Sadow critiqued Ms. Willis’ praise of Mr. Wade’s “professionalism and dignity.”
He posted: “The Court says: ‘However, an odor of mendacity [UNTRUTHFULNESS; TENDENCY TO LIE] remains,’ …. ‘reasonable questions’ about whether Willis and Wade testified truthfully about the timing of their relationship ‘further underpin the finding of an appearance of impropriety and the need to make proportional efforts to cure it.’”
Defense Attorney Says Ruling Vindicates Her Team
By Sam Dorman 1 Hour ago
Defense attorney Ashleigh Merchant, who brought the disqualification motion, opined Judge Scott McAfee’s decision should have gone further but that his words vindicated her team’s arguments.
“While we believe the court should have disqualified Willis’ office entirely, this opinion is a vindication that everything put forth by the defense was true, accurate and relevant to the issues surrounding our client’s right to a fair trial,” she said in a statement, according to Fox News.
Ms. Merchant brought the motion to disqualify Ms. Willis and had a testy interaction with Ms. Willis during her testimony in February.
“The judge clearly agreed with the defense that the actions of Willis are a result of her poor judgment and that there is a risk to the future of this case if she doesn’t quickly work to cure her conflict.”
Ms. Merchant added: “While we do not agree that the courts suggested cure is adequate in response to the egregious conduct by the district attorney, we look forward to the district attorney’s response to the demands by the court. We will continue to fight for our client.”
Defense Attorney Says Ruling Vindicates Her Team
By Sam Dorman 1 Hour ago
Defense attorney Ashleigh Merchant, who brought the disqualification motion, opined Judge Scott McAfee’s decision should have gone further but that his words vindicated her team’s arguments.
“While we believe the court should have disqualified Willis’ office entirely, this opinion is a vindication that everything put forth by the defense was true, accurate and relevant to the issues surrounding our client’s right to a fair trial,” she said in a statement, according to Fox News.
Ms. Merchant brought the motion to disqualify Ms. Willis and had a testy interaction with Ms. Willis during her testimony in February.
“The judge clearly agreed with the defense that the actions of Willis are a result of her poor judgment and that there is a risk to the future of this case if she doesn’t quickly work to cure her conflict.”
Ms. Merchant added: “While we do not agree that the courts suggested cure is adequate in response to the egregious conduct by the district attorney, we look forward to the district attorney’s response to the demands by the court. We will continue to fight for our client.”
Trump Reacts to Wade’s Resignation
By Sam Dorman 1 hour ago
Former President Donald Trump. responding to special prosecutor Nathan Wade’s resignation, derided both District Attorney Fani Willis and Mr. Wade.
“The Fani Willis lover, Mr. Nathan Wade Esq., has just resigned in disgrace, as per his and her reading of the Judge’s Order today,” he said in a post on TruthSocial.
“Nathan was the ‘Special,’ in more ways than one, Prosecutor ‘engaged’ by Fani (pronounced Fauni!) Willis, to persecute TRUMP for Crooked Joe Biden and his Department of Injustice, for purposes of Election Interference and living the life of the Rich & Famous.”
He compared Mr. Wade’s resignation to a would-be resignation from Special Counsel Jack Smith.
“This is the equivalent of Deranged Jack Smith getting ‘canned,’ BIG STUFF, something which should happen in the not too distant future!!!”
Trump Prosecutor Nathan Wade Steps Down
By Sam Dorman 2 Hours ago
Special Prosecutor Nathan Wade has tendered his resignation following the Judge McAfee’s ruling, paving the way for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to continue prosecuting the election case against President Trump.
“I hereby offer my resignation, effective immediately,” Mr. Wade wrote in a letter to Ms. Willis.
He said was resigning “in the interest of democracy, in dedication to the American public, and to move this case forward as quickly as possible.”
“I am proud of the work our team has accomplished in investigating, indicting, and litigating this case,” he said. “Seeking justice for the people of Georgia and the United States, and being part of the effort to ensure that the rule of law and democracy are preserved, has been the honor of a lifetime.”
Mr. Wade didn’t acknowledge wrongdoing but instead quoted the court in stating the defense hadn’t found an actual conflict of interest.
“Although the court found, that ‘the Defendants failed to meet their burden of proving that the District Attorney acquired an actual conflict of interest,’ I am offering my resignation in the interest of democracy.”
Ms. Willis responded with a letter accepting Mr. Wade’s resignation while complimenting him for his “professionalism and dignity.”
She described him as an “outstanding advocate” and praised his “courage” in accepting the special prosecutor role.
Mr. Wade, she said, had “endured threats against you and your family, as well as unjustified attacks in the media and in court on your reputation as a lawyer.”
READ: Nathan Wade’s Resignation Letter
2 Hours ago
Read Nathan Wade’s resignation letter and District Attorney Fani Willis’s acceptance letter here.
Lindsey Graham Blasts ‘Nonsensical’ Ruling
By Sam Dorman 1 hour ago
In a statement, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) criticized Judge McAfee’s decision for “reinforc[ing] the narrative that there is a two-tiered system of justice for President Trump and those around him.”
He suggested the Georgia state Senate or state’s attorney general should “look into” the issue. “Today is a sad day for Georgia,” said Mr. Graham, who serves as ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The ruling, he said, was “nonsensical. When it comes to the prosecution of President Trump and others in Fulton County, Georgia, politics hangs heavy in the air.”
Judge Highlights Unresolved Issues in Willis Disqualification Ruling
By Catherine Yang 1 hour ago
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee ruled that defendants had not met the standard for disqualification of Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in the high-profile election case, but highlighted several unresolved issues in his March 15 order.
The ruling was much anticipated, as Ms. Willis has been the subject of numerous investigations since allegations of an improper relationship and financial benefit were made early this year.
The embattled district attorney is allowed to continue prosecuting the case against former President Donald Trump and 14 codefendants so long as Nathan Wade, the special counsel she appointed named in the motion to disqualify, is taken off the case.
The relationship between Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade was a “significant appearance of impropriety that infects the current structure of the prosecution team,” the judge ruled, finding that the removal of either Mr. Wade or Ms. Willis’s office would “cure” the issue.
The motion to disqualify was brought by Ashleigh Merchant, legal counsel to defendant Michael Roman, whose due diligence when Mr. Wade was appointed to lead the case led to an open records investigation into the district attorney’s finances. She later learned, through a former associate of Mr. Wade’s, of an affair he had with Ms. Willis. The relationship was not previously known by even Ms. Willis’s staff or family, and the prosecutors neither confirmed nor denied it until they filed a required Feb. 2 court filing acknowledging a “personal” relationship.
Judge Questions Honesty of Willis, Wade Testimonies
The timeline of the Willis–Wade relationship became the subject of an evidentiary hearing on the disqualification motion.
Both Mr. Wade and Ms. Willis said the relationship was only romantic in nature between early 2022 and the summer of 2023 but had provided vague answers when questioned about matters like financial benefit and contradictory answers Mr. Wade gave under oath in his divorce proceedings.
As a result, their testimonies did not put “concerns” that the district attorney was “free from any compromising influences … to rest.”
“An odor of mendacity remains,” the judge added, but noted that the court is not obligated “to ferret out every instance of potential dishonesty from each witness or defendant ever presented in open court.”
“Reasonable questions about whether the District Attorney and her hand-selected lead SADA testified untruthfully about the timing of their relationship further underpin the finding of an appearance of impropriety and the need to make proportional efforts to cure it,” the judge wrote.
The appropriate remedy to “appearance of impropriety” was not disqualification when a “less drastic” option was available, he wrote.
He ruled that “as long as Wade remains on the case, this unnecessary perception will persist,” and found a “sufficient remedy” would be for the district attorney to take him off the case, else remove herself and her whole office.
Judge Found Evidence Lacking
In such a motion, the burden of proof rests on the defense.
The district attorney had no requirement to prove a lack of conflict of interest beyond reasonable doubt, but the defense needed to provide such evidence and even after a three-day hearing for which they could subpoena whatever evidence they wished they failed to do so, the judge wrote.
The two witnesses called by the defense in addition to Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade were both deemed less than credible.
Robin Yeartie, a former longtime friend of Ms. Willis’s, said she had “no doubt” that a romantic relationship began “shortly” after they met, but could provide no specifics. After being asked by a defense attorney whether she saw them “hugging, kissing,” she echoed this claim in the affirmative.
The state also accused Ms. Yeartie of being a disgruntled ex-employee, as her resignation coincided with a falling out with Ms. Willis.
The judge did not comment on the resignation but noted that the testimony was lacking in “context and detail” even though it “raised doubts about the State’s assertions.”
Terrence Bradley, who the judge expected to be the “star” witness of the case had been the source of the defense’s awareness of the relationship. Mr. Bradley was a former law partner of Mr. Wade’s and had also represented Mr. Wade in his recent divorce.
Yet, on the witness stand, Mr. Bradley said little to nothing, at first improperly invoking attorney-client privilege and later backtracking on his testimony several times.
“His inconsistencies, demeanor, and generally non-responsive answers left far too brittle a foundation upon which to build any conclusions,” the judge wrote.
Though the judge allowed as evidence a chain of text messages in which Mr. Bradley sent Ms. Merchant details about the Wade–Willis relationship, the defense was never able to establish how Mr. Bradley knew this information as he testified he was only “speculating” when he sent them.
Ethics Complaints Remain
The judge had also criticized the district attorney for her behavior during and outside her testimony in response to the allegations but said this was not a legal reason to disqualify a prosecutor.
“This finding is by no means an indication that the Court condones this tremendous lapse in judgment or the unprofessional manner of the District Attorney’s testimony during the evidentiary hearing,” the judge wrote.
But Georgia law does not find that “simply making bad choices–even repeatedly” is a conflict, and the court’s role is not to rule on matters not brought before it, the judge added.
“Other forums or sources of authority such as the General Assembly, the Georgia State Ethics Commission, the State Bar of Georgia, the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, or the voters of Fulton County may offer feedback on any unanswered questions that linger,” the judge wrote.
Church Speech Was ‘Legally Improper,’ Could Be Grounds for Gag Order
Eight defendants had joined the Roman motion, and several raised arguments of “prejudicial behavior” they believed disqualified the district attorney, and the judge agreed with one raised by attorneys for President Trump, suggesting it could be grounds for a gag order.
The judge found that “personal behind-the-scenes anecdotes” and statements Ms. Willis made before the case were not disqualifying.
He criticized her judgment in giving these interviews but ultimately found that the only improper issue any statement could be tied to was still the relationship, which would be cured if Mr. Wade was off the case.
Days after the Jan. 8 filing, Ms. Willis addressed without confirming the allegations in a widely viewed church speech in which she lambasted her critics as playing the “race card” when they only questioned her hiring of Mr. Wade, but not John Floyd or Anna Cross, who are both white.
The state argued that Ms. Willis was not referring to the defendants, but the judge said, “Maybe so. But maybe not. Therein lies the danger of public comment by a prosecuting attorney.”
The comments did cast “racial aspersions” on the defense though it was too early to argue about prejudicing the jury, the judge found.
“But it was still legally improper. Providing this type of public comment creates dangerous waters for the District Attorney to wade further into,” he wrote.
“The time may well have arrived for an order preventing the State from mentioning the case in any public forum to prevent prejudicial pretrial publicity, but that is not the motion presently before the Court,” the judge wrote.
New Motions May Be Filed
The judge also noted that the many defendants joining the motion to disqualify had brought up a host of other arguments that did not advance grounds for disqualification but could have been better served as separated and more targeted motions.
For example, defendant Cathleen Latham had argued that Ms. Willis was politically motivated, and the judge said this was a selective prosecution issue that should be submitted as a “motion asking the trial court to exercise its judicial power on equal protection grounds.”
Ruling ‘Actually a Win’ for Trump: Expert
By Sam Dorman 1 hour ago
In an interview with NTD, The Epoch Times’s sister media outlet, criminal defense attorney David Gelman criticized Judce Scott McAfee’s ruling, saying it “literally made no sense” and that both Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade should be removed. He added, however, that Judge McAfee’s decision nonetheless helped President Trump and his co-defendants in the Georgia case.
“I do think it is actually a win for Donald Trump’s legal team and the co-defendants because, as a criminal defense attorney, I’m licking my chops to go after Fani Willis and that prosecutor’s office,” he said. “They’re inept. They already messed up the indictment, they had counts already dismissed. They already have been embarrassed. If this goes to trial … they have a very, very slim chance at winning.”
Mr. Gelman also predicted a delay for the trial and speculated it likely wouldn’t start before November, when the presidential election is taking place. A new prosecutor would need time to catch up on the case, he said.
Governor Called Upon to Take Action
4 hours ago
Author and combat veteran Sean Parnell called on Gov. Brian Kemp to “step in & let his AG for after Fani.”
Attorney and commentator Greta Van Susteren similarly called on Gov. Kemp to take action.
“The Governor needs to confront this – failure to do so shows a rogue system,” she posted.
Turning Point founder Charlie Kirk said media personalities on both sides of the political aisle have taken issue with Ms. Willis, highlighting the extent of the impropriety.
“It’s time for Georgia to use SB 332, which Gov Kemp signed into law just this week, and remove the rogue prosecutor in Fulton,” he posted.
On Wednesday, Gov. Kemp re-authorized a commission to sanction and remove prosecutors after signing the Prosecuting Attorneys and Qualifications Commission bill into law last May. The law had been blocked by the Georgia Supreme Court last year but was amended in the legislature weeks later to address the court’s concerns.
“This legislation will help ensure rogue and incompetent prosecutors are held accountable if they refuse to uphold the law,” the governor said.
Experts Say Willis Should Recuse Herself
4 hours ago
Experts and commentators on both sides of the political aisle have said Ms. Willis should recuse herself.
“For the good of the case, given that ethics issues will abound now as to Willis, she should voluntarily recuse herself from the case and allow another prosecutor to oversee the GA trump case,” wrote Andrew Weissmann, former assistant U.S. Attorney and MSNBC co-host.
Heritage Foundation senior legal fellows Hans von Spakovsky and Charles Stimson similarly said Ms. Willis should choose to recuse herself.
“Fani Willis should recuse herself and her entire office from the cases. The court found that through her own conduct, there was a clear appearance of impropriety and that her speech at an Atlanta church was ‘legally improper.’ Attorney Nathan Wade should also recuse himself, and the court found his testimony not to be credible. These cases should be referred to the Georgia Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council for reassignment,” they stated.
GOP Lawmakers Blast Decision
4 hours ago
Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) accused the judge of being politically motivated and posted on social media that “Fani Willis should be disbarred,” calling for the RICO indictment charges to be dropped.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) similarly questioned Judge McAfee’s impartiality, arguing that he “worked for Fani Willis and donated to her campaign” and said the judge “should have recused himself in the first place.”
Rep. Greene called on the state ethics board to investigate Ms. Willis, adding that “I’ve filed multiple complaints!”
“The corrupt in Fulton County, Georgia is some of the worst in the nation. It makes most of us in Georgia sick,” she posted.
Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) similarly described the case as a “witch-hunt” and “election interference.” He called for disciplinary action against Ms. Willis, saying she not only should “have been disqualified, she should be disbarred.”
Judge Targets Fani Willis for ‘Legally Improper’ Comments
While the judge in former President Donald Trump’s Georgia case allowed District Attorney Fani Willis to remain on the case, he criticized her for making a racially charged speech in mid-January in which she invoked the “race card.”
The Jan. 14 speech was given by Ms. Willis just days after allegations surfaced that she engaged in an improper relationship with her special counsel at an Atlanta church. Ms. Willis, who is black, appeared to suggest that court motions filed against her were based on a racial animus against her, while providing no evidence.
The comments, Judge Scott McAfee ruled Friday, was “legally improper,” and “providing this type of public comment creates dangerous waters for the District Attorney to wade further into.”
Attorneys for President Trump filed a motion accusing Ms. Willis of potentially injecting a bias into the case, which could influence the jury pool. They argued that she should be disqualified for her remarks, although Friday’s ruling allowed her to stay on the case.
Ms. Willis’ remarks were made in a general sense and did not specifically address any of the allegations against President Trump or the other co-defendants in the case, her office had argued. She also was not making any claims about the defendants in the case.
But Judge McAfee said it wasn’t clear whom she was referring to. The “effect of this speech was to cast racial aspersions at an indicted Defendant’s decision to file this pretrial motion,” the judge wrote in his order.
“In these public and televised comments, the District Attorney complained that a Fulton County Commissioner ‘and so many others’ questioned her decision to hire SADA Wade,” he wrote, referring to special counsel Nathan Wade. “When referring to her detractors throughout the speech, she frequently utilized the plural ’they.’ The State argues the speech was not aimed at any of the Defendants in this case. Maybe so. But maybe not. Therein lies the danger of public comment by a prosecuting attorney,” he added.
The judge ultimately wrote that she made no specific references to the allegations and the defendants still had the “opportunity for a fundamentally fair trial.”
“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,” Judge McAfee wrote. “Nor did it disclose sensitive or confidential evidence yet to be revealed or admitted at trial.”
The judge did not appear to impose any penalties on the district attorney for her comments at the church.
What Was Claimed
In late January, Trump attorneys Steve Sadow and Jennifer Little filed a motion that accused her of making improper comments at the church.
“These assertions by the DA engender a great likelihood of substantial prejudice towards the defendants in the eyes of the public in general, and prospective jurors in Fulton County in particular,” they wrote. “Moreover, the DA’s self-serving comments came with the added, sought after, benefit of garnering racially based sympathy for her self-inflicted quagmire.”
In her speech at the church, Ms. Willis said that she had three outside lawyers working as special prosecutors in the election case—a white man, a white woman, and a black man. She noted that people have only questioned the qualifications of Mr. Wade, the black man.
President Trump’s lawyers wrote in their motion that her comments “constitute a glaring, flagrant, and calculated effort to foment racial bias into this case by publicly denouncing the defendants for somehow daring to question her decision to hire a Black man (without also mentioning that she is alleged to have had a workplace affair with the same man) to be a special prosecutor.”
“The DA’s provocative and inflammatory extrajudicial racial comments, made in a widely publicized speech at a historical Black church in Atlanta, and cloaked in repeated references to God, reinforce and amplify the ‘appearance of impropriety’ in her judgment and prosecutorial conduct,” the lawyers wrote.
Wade Must Step Down
Judge McAfee on Friday wrote that either Ms. Willis has to step down, or she must terminate Mr. Wade’s employment in the Trump case, saying he did not find that her relationship with Mr. Wade amounted to a conflict of interest that should force her off the most sprawling of the four criminal cases against the former president.
And, the judge ruled, Ms. Willis can stay on the case only if Mr. Wade withdraws due to “an appearance of impropriety” that impacted the prosecution team. The judge criticized Ms. Willis for a “tremendous” lapse of judgement and questioned the truthfulness of their testimony about the timing of their relationship.
“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.
It’s not clear if Ms. Willis will step down or remove Mr. Wade.
“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,” he continued to say.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
‘Like Finding 2 People in a Bank Vault and Taking One Off to Jail’: Expert
4 hours ago
Legal expert Jonathan Turley said the judge left a lot of unanswered questions in his ruling.
“This avoided the cliff but it did not avoid the questions that will inevitably come up. It’s like finding two people in a bank vault and taking one off to jail,” Mr. Turley told Fox News. “The appearance problem that the judge identified with regards to Wade was directly related to his relationship with Willis. They both testified in the same way, they were the two parts of this relationship, and only one of them was disqualified.”
“Why should Willis escape that same penalty? The opinion leaves us feeling like the court went and shot the wounded,” he said.
Dershowitz: Judge ‘Doesn’t Have the Guts’ to Disqualify
5 hours ago
Alan Dershowitz, professor emeritus at Harvard Law, said in National Report interview that the outcome was what he predicted while criticizing the judge.
Dershowitz is Pissed over the Fani Willis ruling, Judge McAfee “didn’t have the guts” to do the right thing. 🔥🔥🔥pic.twitter.com/T5737ZBVpO
— Freedom 🇺🇸🦅 (@PU28453638) March 15, 2024
Mr. Dershowitz alleged Ms. Willis perjured herself and conspired to commit perjury with Mr. Wade.
“Who are we going to believe, this judge or your lying eyes? We all know there was an actual conflict of interest here. He just didn’t have the guts to say it and I predicted he wouldn’t have the guts to say it, he has to live in Fulton County,” Mr. Dershowitz said. “He said some things that were very critical of her, but still, he should have removed her from the case.”
Trump Attorney Responds
5 hours ago
“While respecting the Court’s decision, we believe that the Court 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,” stated Steve Sadow, lead defense counsel for President Trump in Fulton County, Georgia.
“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.”
Judge Takes Issue With Willis’s Church Speech
5 hours ago
During Ms. Willis’s church speech, she lambasted a Fulton County Commissioner “and so many others” for criticizing her decision to hire Mr. Wade.
“The State argues the speech was not aimed at any of the Defendants in this case. Maybe so. But maybe not,” the judge wrote. “Therein lies the danger of public comment by a prosecuting attorney.”
Mr. Sadow had argued in court that media coverage of the speech was that Ms. Willis was talking about the defendants.
The judge agreed, finding that Ms. Willis “cast racial aspersions” on the defendants, though it was too early to make arguments about prejudicing the jury pool.
“But it was still legally improper. Providing this type of public comment creates dangerous waters for the District Attorney to wade further into,” he wrote.
“The time may well have arrived for an order preventing the State from mentioning the case in any public forum to prevent prejudicial pretrial publicity, but that is not the motion presently before the Court,” the judge wrote.
Other Claims
5 hours ago
The judge noted that the eight defendants joining the Roman motion had brought a variety of other claims perhaps better suited to separate motions as they did not advance a motion to dismiss based on conflict of interest.
Defendant Cathy Latham had argued that Ms. Willis was politically motivated, and the judge said this was a selective prosecution issue that should be submitted as a “motion asking the trial court to exercise its judicial power on equal protection grounds.”
He also referenced additional issues before the state ethics board; since the Jan. 8 allegations, several investigations into and ethics complaints have been made against Ms. Willis, but those were not issues presented to the court.
“Other forums or sources of authority such as the General Assembly, the Georgia State Ethics Commission, the State Bar of Georgia, the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, or the voters of Fulton County may offer feedback on any unanswered questions that linger.”
DA Office
The Fulton County District Attorney’s office did not respond to a request for comment.
What to Know About the Decision
6 hours ago
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee ruled on March 15 that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis does not need to step down from prosecuting the high-profile case against former President Donald Trump and 14 others if special counsel Nathan Wade is taken off the case.
The district attorney stepping aside would remove her entire office from the case, which would then need to wait for reassignment to another prosecutor. Mr. Wade is an outside attorney contracted by the office and his leaving the case would allow it to continue without any delay.
Hours later, Mr. Wade tendered his resignation, effective immediately.
Full Judgment
Read the order here.
The judge granted in part and denied in part the motion to disqualify.
He found that the defense failed to prove “an actual conflict of interest,” but the relationship between Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade was a “significant appearance of impropriety that infects the current structure of the prosecution team.”
The decision came after three days of testimony, including Ms. Willis’s own heated testimony on the witness stand, and additional arguments in court.
Ms. Willis had hired Mr. Wade as special prosecutor to lead the case against President Trump and 14 others for allegedly violating Georgia’s racketeering law in their challenge of the 2020 elections.
The attorney for one of the defendants alleged an “improper” relationship between Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade, and a conflict of interest and financial benefit to Ms. Willis that was grounds to disqualify her as prosecutor and dismiss the indictment.
Prior to the evidentiary hearing, Ashleigh Merchant, attorney for defendant Michael Roman, suggested she obtained information supporting the allegations through a former law partner of Mr. Wade’s. Ms. Merchant took the lead in calling on and questioning witnesses for the defense and was later subpoenaed by a Georgia Senate panel to testify about her investigation into the district attorney’s hiring and budget practices.
Appearance of Impropriety Persists ‘As Long As Wade Remains’
The judge found that even if conflict of interest was not proven, the appearance of impropriety applied because “a perceived conflict in the reasonable eyes of the public threatens confidence in the legal system itself.”
Yet the remedy for an appearance issue is not disqualification, he added.
To remedy the appearance issue, which was caused by the relationship, one of the parties had to leave the case, the judge decided.
Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade had testified that the romantic relationship ended in the summer of 2023, but the judge said the testimony also highlighted that the appearance issue would persist.
“As the District Attorney testified, her relationship with Wade has only ‘cemented’ after these motions and ‘is stronger than ever,'” the judge wrote. “Wade’s patently unpersuasive explanation for the inaccurate interrogatories he submitted in his pending divorce indicates a willingness on his part to wrongly conceal his relationship with the District Attorney.”
As it stands, “reasonable members of the public” could continue to wonder if there is a financial benefit or continued romantic relation, he 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.”
Conflict of Interest Standard for Disqualification
In the order, Judge McAfee explained that disqualification is not a statutory standard but a “remedy” in the public interest; that public prosecutors must serve the public interest rather than private or political interest.
But “conflict of interest” is a factual standard, the judge continued. The fact that Mr. Wade was paid by the hour and could have had an interest in billing many hours is not a violation.
“Nor would a romantic relationship between prosecutors, standing alone, typically implicate disqualification, assuming neither prosecutor had the ability to pay the other as long as the relationship persisted,” the judge wrote. But in the current case, the combination of the romantic relationship and speculation of “improper motivations” complicated matters.
In such a motion, the burden of proof rests on the defense, which ultimately could not provide the evidence to contradict Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade’s testimonies. They also could show no forensic misconduct, or tie the alleged conflicts to prejudice.
“Defendants have failed to demonstrate that the District Attorney’s conduct has impacted or influenced the case to the Defendants’ detriment,” the judge wrote.
The judge criticized the district attorney’s behavior in response to the allegations however, writing that she displayed “tremendous lapse of judgment” and testified in an “unprofessional manner in the evidentiary hearing.
“Georgia law does not permit the finding of an actual conflict for simply making bad choices – even repeatedly,” he wrote.
‘Odor of Mendacity’: Judge Criticizes Willis Behavior
6 hours ago
The judge criticized the district attorney’s behavior in response to the allegations however, writing that she displayed “tremendous lapse of judgment” and testified in an “unprofessional manner in the evidentiary hearing.
“Georgia law does not permit the finding of an actual conflict for simply making bad choices – even repeatedly,” he wrote.
The judge questioned the credibility of the defense witnesses, but took issue with the state’s testimonies as well, writing that “an odor of mendacity remains” even if the defense’s evidence did not supply proof.
However, “the Court is not under an obligation to ferret out every instance of potential dishonesty from each witness or defendant ever presented in open court.”
“Yet reasonable questions about whether the District Attorney and her hand-selected lead SADA testified untruthfully about the timing of their relationship further underpin the finding of an appearance of impropriety and the need to make proportional efforts to cure it.”
Defense Witnesses’ Credibility Questioned
6 hours ago
Two witnesses the defendants called to testify on the timeline of Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade’s relationship both had their credibility called into question by the state.
Robin Yeartie, a former longtime friend of Ms. Willis’s, said Ms. Willis had told her about meeting Mr. Wade at a conference in 2019. Ms. Yeartie said a romantic relationship between the two began “shortly” after, that same year, and that there was “no doubt” in her mind that the two were dating, displaying signs of physical affection like “hugging, kissing.”
However, she was unable to provide any specifics, and the judge found her testimony lacking in “context and detail.”
Ms. Yeartie had worked as a press aide in the district attorney’s office and resigned from her job, which coincided with a falling out with Ms. Willis after which they never spoke again. The state accused Ms. Yeartie of being a disgruntled former employee.
Terrence Bradley, a former law partner of Mr. Wade’s, had also represented Mr. Wade in his recent divorce. Prior to the trial, Ms. Merchant suggested Mr. Bradley was the source of her information for the allegations. But during the first two days of testimony, Mr. Bradley said everything he knew was covered by attorney-client privilege because he had represented Mr. Wade during his divorce.
After a closed-door meeting in the judge’s chamber, Judge McAfee determined that his knowledge was not subject to attorney-client privilege, calling Mr. Bradley back for a third day of testimony during which he only said he “could not recall” or had been “speculating” when read text messages he sent to Ms. Merchant.
Judge McAfee ultimately found that he was “unable to place any stock in the testimony of Terrence Bradley.”
“His inconsistencies, demeanor, and generally non-responsive answers left far too brittle a foundation upon which to build any conclusions,” the judge wrote.
Call Phone Data Not Proof
6 hours ago
Trump attorneys had hired a private investigator who was able to subpoena Mr. Wade’s cell phone data, finding 12,000 texts exchanged between Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade more than a year before they said their romantic relationship began.
It also put Mr. Wade in the proximity of a condo Ms. Willis sublet from Ms. Yeartie in what looked like two overnight stays.
The judge said this was not definitive proof that Mr. Wade and Ms. Willis’s testimonies were false or that they lied about the timeline of the relationship.
“Even after considering the proffered cellphone testimony from Defendant Trump, along with the entirety of the other evidence, neither side was able to conclusively establish by a preponderance of the evidence when the relationship evolved into a romantic one,” the judge wrote.
DA Anecdotes Not Disqualifying
5 hours ago
Ms. Willis had been disqualified from prosecuting a separate, related case last year against Fulton Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney, as she had helped fundraise for the defendant’s political opponent.
In that case, statements she had made prior to the case were not taken into account. Following that standard, Judge McAfee discounted statements Ms. Willis made before July 31, 2023, and said that even more recent comments describing the election indictment or “personal behind-the-scenes anecdotes are not disqualifying.”
“This includes the District Attorney’s unorthodox decision to make on-the-record comments, and authorize members of her staff to do likewise, to authors intent on publishing a book about the special grand jury’s investigation during the pendency of this case.”
Defense Witnesses’ Credibility Questioned
Two witnesses the defendants called to testify on the timeline of Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade’s relationship both had their credibility called into question by the state.
Robin Yeartie, a former longtime friend of Ms. Willis’s, said Ms. Willis had told her about meeting Mr. Wade at a conference in 2019. Ms. Yeartie said a romantic relationship between the two began “shortly” after, that same year, and that there was “no doubt” in her mind that the two were dating, displaying signs of physical affection like “hugging, kissing.”
Ms. Yeartie also worked as a press aide in the district attorney’s office and resigned from her job, which coincided with a falling out with Ms. Willis after which they never spoke again.
Terrence Bradley, a former law partner of Mr. Wade’s, had also represented Mr. Wade in his recent divorce. Prior to the trial, Ms. Merchant suggested Mr. Bradley was the source of her information for the allegations. But during testimony, he repeatedly declined to answer due to attorney-client privilege.
Near the end of his testimony, a lawyer for the district attorney revealed Mr. Bradley left the law firm between him, Mr. Wade, and a third attorney after an employee accused him of sexual assault. He previously claimed it was something he could not speak about due to attorney-client privilege, prompting the judge and defense to note that aspects to which Mr. Bradley invoked privilege may not in fact be covered.
The hearing only focused on the extent of the relationship and any alleged financial benefit to Ms. Willis.
During Ms. Willis’s testimony, she accused Ms. Merchant of lying more than once.
Judge Gave Rare Interview Before Decision
By Sam Dorman 5 hours ago
Judge McAfee had previewed his decision during an interview with WSB on Thursday. He said he wanted to convey “that no ruling of mine is ever going to be based on politics.”
“I’m going to be following the law as best I understand it,” he added.
In a prior interview, he told WSB that he looked forward to discussing the case with his kids when they got older. “What I’m looking forward to one day is maybe they grow up a little bit and ask me about it, and I’m looking forward to looking them in the eye and tell them I played it straight and I did the best I could,” he said of his 5 and 3-year-old kids.
Ripple Effect
After the huge allegations made in the Jan. 8 motion, half the defendants joined the motion to disqualify, adding other reasons such as “prejudicial behavior.”
The scandal also snowballed far beyond Judge McAfee’s courtroom.
Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade had kept their relationship private, and the timeline covers a period during which Mr. Wade was still married. After the relationship was first mentioned in the Jan. 8 motion, Mr. Wade’s then-wife filed in divorce court bank statements that corroborated the trips mentioned in the election case, including tickets in Ms. Willis’s name. Ms. Wade also tried to subpoena Ms. Willis for a deposition regarding her spouse’s financial situation, but Mr. Wade settled the divorce case before he or Ms. Willis was called on to testify.
The allegation that Ms. Willis may have misused public funds also led to other probes.
Fulton County Audit Committee Chair Bob Ellis sent a letter to Ms. Willis asking whether she “misused” county funds or “accepted valuable gifts and personal benefits from a contractor.”
The Georgia House of Representatives then passed a bill to give an oversight panel the power to remove “rogue prosecuting attorneys who abuse their office.”
The Georgia Senate also adopted a resolution to create a committee investigating the Willis allegations. According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, State Sen. Bill Cowsert said at the panel’s inaugural meeting on Feb. 9 that multiple “whistleblowers” inside Ms. Willis’s office have already come forward with “allegations about the misuse of both federal funds and state funds.”
Then on Feb. 21, the Fulton County Board of Ethics called a special meeting scheduled for March 7 to hear two complaints brought against Ms. Willis, but later canceled it finding it had no jurisdiction over the district attorney, who is a state officer. A third individual then brought an ethics complaint against Ms. Willis for campaign finance issues to the Georgia State Ethics Commission.
The House Judiciary Committee has also already been investigating Ms. Willis on the allegations that her case is politically motivated, and after the new allegations subpoenaed Ms. Willis and extended its investigation to cover Mr. Wade.
Georgia Judge Dismisses 6 Charges in Trump Election Case
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee on March 13 ruled on several demurrers in the case against former President Donald Trump and 14 codefendants, striking six counts from the 41-count indictment against them.
The demurrers, or formal challenges to pleadings by the prosecution, were brought by President Trump, former White House chief-of-staff Mark Meadows, and attorneys John Eastman, Ray Smith III, Robert Cheeley, and Rudy Giuliani.
Three of the quashed charges apply to President Trump, throwing out counts related to a phone call he made to the Georgia Secretary of State.
The indictment originally charged 19 defendants, four of whom have since taken plea bargains. All were charged with violating Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act and with 40 additional counts.
The ruling comes ahead of an expected decision this week on a motion to disqualify Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from prosecuting the case.
