Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and her ex-lover Nathan Wade sat in court Friday afternoon while a prosecutor with the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office begged Judge Scott McAfee to let Willis and Wade stay on the case State of Georgia v. Donald J. Trump. Before prosecutor Adam Abbate began his closing argument, Willis, who wore a red dress and her hair curled, looked grim and close to tears.
McAfree appeared skeptical of the prosecutor’s argument that the defense would need to prove an “actual conflict of interest” in order for the judge to remove Willis and Wade from the case. He pointed out that several Georgia cases discuss removal of prosecutors simply on the basis of an “appearance of impropriety,” a lower standard than an actual conflict of interest.
If McAfee does indeed decide to use the standard of an “appearance of impropriety,” the defense would only need to show that a reasonable person could conclude from the evidence that Willis engaged in wrongdoing.
Defense attorneys offered a multitude of arguments in court Friday for Willis’ disqualification. Through it all, they remained adamant that such a decision would be necessary to ensure public trust in the judiciary. “If this court allows this kind of behavior to go on,” said defense attorney John B. Merchant III, “the entire public confidence in the system will be shot and the integrity of the system will be undermined.”
Merchant claimed the appearance of impropriety stemmed from Willis’ decision to hire her boyfriend to be the special prosecutor and Wade’s subsequent use of his earnings from that job to take Willis on a variety of vacations. Merchant asserted that Willis made up her claim that she paid Wade back in cash for the trips as part of a coverup. He concluded this from the fact that Wade did not discuss the supposed cash paybacks in an affidavit he filed last month.
Meanwhile, defense attorney Steve Sadow narrowed in on a speech that Willis delivered at an Atlanta church in January. During that speech, Willis claimed that the defense’s efforts to remove her and Wade from the case were motivated by the pair’s race. This, Sadow asserted, was a “calculated determination” to prejudice the public against the defendants. “Can you think of anything more that would heighten public condemnation of the defendant than alleging that defense counsel and defendants were making their motion based on race and religion?” asked Sadow. He further suggested that the two were dishonest on the stand about when their relationship began; Sadow told the judge that he would only need to find that there were “legitimate concerns about their credibility,” not that they had lied.
Craig Gillen, another defense attorney, pointed to the fact that Wade lied in filings in his divorce case when he said he had never engaged in extramarital relationships. He agreed with Sadow that the claim that Willis paid Wade back in cash for the trips is highly suspect. “What we have here,” said Gillen, “is a fraud on this court, which has been shown overwhelmingly by the evidence.”
After the defense delivered its closing arguments, the prosecution simply fell back, over and over, to the argument that the defense’s efforts to remove Willis from the case were intended to “embarrass and harass” Willis and “impugn her character.”
At the end of the hearing, Judge McAfee announced that he will return a decision on the question within two weeks. “There are several legal issues to sort through, several factual determinations that I have to make,” he said.
Based on how the hearing proceeded today, it seems very likely that Fani Willis will be removed from the case.