Below is my column in The Messenger on the unfolding Fani Willis scandal in Georgia. The court has indicated that it may hold hearings on the controversy in early February. That could present a possible delay if the court believes that a change in prosecutors (or even a change in venue) is needed in the interests of justice. In my view, Willis made a strategic mistake in attacking the estranged wife of her alleged lover in a filing this week, alleging that she is both an adulterer and a political conspirator.
Here is the column:
Chris Christie once said that Donald Trump is often portrayed by legal counsel as “the unluckiest S.O.B. in the world.” Perhaps, but when it comes to his enemies, Trump sometimes seems to find advantages despite his worst efforts.
Many of us have criticized Trump for his personal attacks on Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis as being racist and unethical; he even accused her of having an affair with a gang member, a claim that was widely contested as unfounded and denied by key figures.
This month, however, Willis has seemingly imploded with an ethical scandal which, unlike Trump’s prior claims, appears perhaps to be more well-founded, as it appears in an official court filing. It involves reports of an intimate relationship with Nathan Wade, appointed by Willis as lead prosecutor in the Trump case. While a recusal or removal of Willis may delay the case, it will not end the legal threat for Trump.
Willis is accused of having a romantic relationship with Wade when she appointed him in this historic prosecution of a former president. Wade has no experience in racketeering law, yet he reportedly was paid more than an expert on Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) cases.
Willis and Wade allegedly went on lavish vacations together, and the costs allegedly were covered by Wade, who has received nearly $654,000 in legal fees since January 2022 — approved, ultimately, by Willis.
Wade has presented himself as the “only individual in the DA’s office who had authority to enter into agreements pertaining to the investigation.”
Wade also has been held in contempt in his messy divorce.
The Georgia courts have established that a district attorney should be disqualified when there is a personal interest in the defendant’s conviction (Whitworth v. State, 275 Ga. App. 790, 793, 622 S.E.2d 21 [2005]). In this instance, Willis has staked much of her career on this case and appointed a prosecutor who’s alleged to be romantically involved with her; likewise, if the allegations are true, Willis may have an interest in furthering Wade’s career and benefits. Of course, Trump, the other defendants, and the public are entitled to disinterested prosecutors in this major case.
Moreover, the Fulton County Code of Laws § 2-66 bars conflicts of interest “in fact and in appearance.” It expressly states that no “officer or employee shall, by his or her conduct, give reasonable basis for the impression that any person can improperly influence him or her, or unduly enjoy his or her favor, in the performance of any official acts or actions.” These provisions are in addition to prohibitions on the receipt of gifts due to one’s office, such as possibly receiving alleged lavish vacations paid for by your subordinate.
These are just some of the grounds supporting a motion by Michael Roman, one of the defendants in the massive racketeering case brought by Willis.
If these allegations are true, Willis is not just outside of the ethical navigational beacons. She is off the map.
Notably, Willis decided to respond to these serious allegations after days of criticism by speaking before the Bethel AME Church in Atlanta. She did not deny having an intimate relationship with Wade. Instead, she claimed that the criticism was due to their race. After all, she noted, her critics are not questioning the two white people she appointed. However, she failed to mention the salient fact — that she was not allegedly involved romantically with the other two prosecutors.
“They only attacked one,” she proclaimed. “First thing they say, ‘Oh, she’s gonna play the race card now.’
Well, not just the first thing. It will probably be the last thing “they” say, too.
This effort to spin an allegedly unethical relationship as a racist attack is itself a disgrace. Willis, the highest-ranking prosecutor in her jurisdiction, certainly can defend her hiring of Wade — but she should not trigger racial tensions to shield herself from scrutiny.
All of this leads to an inescapable conclusion: Both Willis and Wade should recuse themselves from the case. Their continuation in the case undermines the prosecution and is clearly not in the public interest.
A less obvious question is how their recusal could impact the Trump prosecution. Some analysts suggest the scandal removes the threat to him in Fulton County. That, however, is not likely to be true.
The remedy in this instance for any unethical conduct, if proven, may be the removal of the prosecutors, not the dismissal of an otherwise valid criminal case. While I have been critical of Willis’ case against Trump, her conduct does not change the underlying allegations against the former president.
The removal of Willis and Wade could also prompt the transfer of the case to a different jurisdiction.
Any of these changes could take time, of course, and the delay would play to Trump’s advantage. Yet, the case still would go on.
The most intriguing question is whether a new prosecutor would continue to support this controversial RICO case. Every prosecutor is under a personal obligation to determine whether there is an ethical basis to prosecute. Some prosecutors would likely balk at the tenuous connections used to sweep Trump into this grand conspiracy theory, which many critics believe Willis has pursued for political purposes.
Thus, an outside prosecutor might not share her priorities for prosecution. The Georgia case has a number of credible criminal charges against various defendants. The question is whether there would be the same overriding interest in bagging Trump under this novel alleged criminal enterprise.
Willis once reminded her staff that “this is business, it will never be personal.” The problem is that the current scandal suggests it may have been a bit too much of a personal business when it came to appointing her lead prosecutor. The best way to protect this prosecution — and the office — is for her to step aside and allow justice to take its course — without Willis or Wade.
Jonathan Turley, an attorney, constitutional law scholar and legal analyst, is the Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law at The George Washington University Law School.
Mr. Turley, early in your article you suggest that Mr. Trump’s initial criticism of the prosecutor may have been racially motivated. I believe this is unfair and frankly beneath you. You make this charge, without proof, and at the same time knowing it cannot be disproved. I believe what you are doing is the same thing the prosecutor does, and which you criticize her for, when she claims the criticism from Trump regarding Mr. Wade, are racially motivated. As always I enjoy reading your perspective.
I also like Mr. Turley, who however, in spite of it all, loves his democrat party.
The circus that is Fulton County, has been crooked for decades. These clowns coordinated with the White House to bring these charges, period.
Bill O’Reilly has reported that Wade has been to the Biden White House at least twice. What is that about, coordinating?
Willis too, had met with senior White House and J6 Committee members before filing chatges against Trump and the other defendants.
If they start prosecuting presidents for any reason, in the future, US presidents will consider their own liabilities before making any mayor decision, instead of considering the interests of the country and the American people FIRST. There are too many lawsuit already in thus country, and too many lawyers who benefit of them. Only billonaries like Soros can give so much money to prosecutors for their elections and buy them. This whole situation is crazy.
I believe you are forgetting that Wade was not legally appointed by Willis per Georgia law. Wade is a citizen. Citizens are not allowed to convine a Grand Jury, take depositions. Everything he was involved with is now ” Poison Fruit”. Just as Edwin Meese pointed out in his amicus brief Jack Smith wasn’t. Properly appointed by Federal law. Both have no standing before any court.
Willis also failed to be granted approval by Fulton County to hire Wade.
Well, why the hell not, this President who stole the Election, the one Turley refuses to admit was stolen, which any tad pole could tell you, will not say what we al know The White House is coordinating every charge in every state. This is illegal, the White House can’t get LAWFARE to go after Trump via what we all know is BS charges. Turley, you saying this has the MOST MERIT is BS, in 1960 Hawaii sent BOTH DELEGATIONS of Electors to DC. There is no President Elect until the Electors sat so via a vote. We all know these commies stole the lection. I think you are afraid to man up and tell the damned truth, but I give you and all like you this warning Mr. Turley, our Forefathers would have rather died than be silenced by cowardice. We are already a banana republic because men like you did nothing with your megahorn.
The election wasn’t stolen. That you believe something doesn’t make it knowledge.
That you believe the election was not stolen, does not make it so either…
The election was stolen.
You’re just not smart enough to understand how.
It wasn’t ‘one thing’ but a combination of multiple things.
That we see fact after fact proof after proof that derelict prosecutors won’t bring to trial does make it…knowledge.
Creepy old hair sniffing quid pro “roach” joe, the current resident select only won due to that domination voting company and typical leftist vote stuffing.
Stolen or not the collusion with the white house and the dnc in all these prosecutions is criminal. 70 plus years of life for President Trump and no felonies announce your candidacy and 90+ felony charges within months. Only koolaid drinking marxist believe it’s anything but election interference
Exactly !!!
“she claimed that the criticism was due to their race.”
If Willis plays the race card, should others respond with a claim of affirmative action? Which is more likely, considering the mess she is in? Neither game should be played, so why did she start this game?
Trump needs a dementia test.
In his speech tonight, he said “BTW they never report the crowd on January 6. You know Nikki Haley, Nikki Haley, Nikki Haley, you know they -, do you know they destroyed all of the information, all of the evidence, everything, deleted and destroyed all of it. All of it. Because of lots of things, like Nikki Haley is in charge of security. We offered her 10,000 people.”
And in the same speech, he said that Putin, Xi, and Kim Jong Un were “very fine people.” They’re dictators! He envies them.
The bigger picture is the collusion between Soros funding, the White House, the select J6 committee, Letitia James, and Fanni Willis. It’s election interference, fraud and corruption to the highest levels.
Precisely
I wish itherscould see this comment. There is collusion among the party involved. Why this prosecutor had to go to the White House and paid like $6,000 for one day? They should investigste this meet o no too.
Someone claiming to be a GA attorney keeps claiming that there is nothing in GA law that provides a legal basis for FW’s disqualification. That claim is false.
“Fulton County Code of Laws § 2-66 bars conflicts of interest ‘in fact and in appearance.” It expressly states that no ‘officer or employee shall, by his or her conduct, give reasonable basis for the impression that any person can improperly influence him or her, or unduly enjoy his or her favor, in the performance of any official acts or actions.’”
Her hiring her lover, who then funded her vacations, is a conflict in both appearance and fact, which most definitely gives the impression that he can “improperly influence” her in her “performance of . . . official acts.”
To wit:
I, FW, need to do some more investigations here or there. More billable hours for my lover, and more vacations for me.
Let’s add more charges, which of course means more research. More billable hours . . .
I don’t think we have enough depositions. More billable hours . . .
I think you, lover boy, should interview so-and-so. More billable hours . . .
And if that is *not* a “reasonable basis,” then there is no such thing.
Exactly
FW is the poster child for the Left’s MO: Can I get away with it?
Jonathan: DJT is worried. So even before the DC Court of Appeals has issued its decision DJT has written his own opening brief with the SC–trying to lobby the high court to give him absolute immunity from criminal prosecution.. Here is his latest post on Truth Social (all in caps):
“A president of the United States must have full immunity, without which it would be impossible for him/her to properly function. Any mistake, even if well intended, would be met with almost certain indictment by the opposing party at term end. Even events that ‘cross the line’ must fall under total immunity, or it will be years of trauma trying to determine good from bad….All presidents must have complete and total presidential immunity, or the authority and decisiveness of a president of the United States will be stripped & gone forever. Hopefully, this will be an easy decision. God bless the Supreme Court”.
Sounds like the rantings and ravings of King Lear? This wannabe King thinks he has a divine right to rule even if he may “cross the line” and commit criminal acts–like having Seal team 6 kill one of his political opponents, burning down the WH or selling an office to a political supporter. Such acts, DJT claims are beyond the law–otherwise there will toil and trouble–“trauma” in the Kingdom.
I doubt that’s what the Founders had in mind when they sat down to write the Constitution. They specifically wrote a document to abolish the Divine Right of Kings. Ultimately, the Supreme Court will have the final say. But it won’t be an “easy decision” as DJT claims. The Supremes will have to wrestle with the express language in the Constitution. It is clear the drafters of the Constitution knew how to grant immunity when they wanted. They did it in the Speech and Debate clause and in double jeopardy. They could, but didn’t give the president similar immunity from criminal prosecution. That means DJT should lose before the SC. Otherwise, we will no longer be a nation of laws but just another Banana Republic!
Now I doubt anyone on this blog would disagree–except maybe for the other Anonymous who went over the wall years ago–maybe even George who is up on the Divine Right of Kings!
There’s no guarantee that SCOTUS will even grant cert. It may be that the DC Court of Appeals rules against him with a good argument and SCOTUS denies cert. That would let the trial move forward on a reasonable calendar.
DJT’s argument is ridiculous. He wants absolute immunity himself, but he wouldn’t want Biden to have it, and apparently DJT is too stupid or narcissistic to understand the implications of his argument.
Dennis. Trump just cribbed that from AG Eric Holder, justifying assassinating a US citizen without due process
They specifically wrote a document to abolish the Divine Right of Kings. Ultimately, the Supreme Court will have the final say.
You honestly don’t see the incongruity of that observation do you?
The President is not the King . . . Because SCOTUS is the King.
If you start prosecuting presidents, all our presidents will be found guilty for one reason or another. All of them. Obama for killing a terrorist that was not formally found guilty in a court of law, for instance. They can literally send to courts to past presidents for any of the thousands of decisions they made while in office. Not all of them are billonaries. Very few of them will be able to survive. This would be a nightmare.
Any former President who’s committed a crime should be prosecuted for it. Al Awlaki’s family filed a wrongful death suit, and it was dismissed by a court.
Incorrect. The remedy for a President is impeachment. Trump will win easily on this one.
DEI hire, DEI Result. It’s kismet!
I think orange could go well with Fanni’s complexion.
Orange woman bad?
Trump’s already chosen it as his color.
I wonder what the other two special prosecutors on the case were thinking, you know? At what point did the dime drop? I wonder what they are thinking now. I wonder what the taxpayers of Georgia are thinking. It’s their money paying for the whole mess.
Willis and Wade are lawyers right?
They went to law school right?
Generally that takes some degree of intelligence right?
Then why are they doing everything straight out of the Things You Do NOT Do When Having an Affair, playbook?
Hear, hear!
Sub rosa would have been intuitive and made perfect sense.
Alas, that would have required abundant prolific contents in the cranial vault.
Upstate: “Willis and Wade are lawyers right?
They went to law school right?
Generally that takes some degree of intelligence right?”
+++
Not if they are part of what is called a ‘protected class’.
There should be only one protected class in this country: AMERICAN.
Thank you.
There is only one class in America: Citizens.
Congress cannot tax for individual, specific, and particular welfare per the constitutional restrictions and limitations on Congress that allow it to tax for ONLY “general Welfare” (i.e. all, or the whole, well proceed).
Congress cannot redirect supplemental constitutional rights, freedoms, privileges, and immunities to individual, specific, and particular citizens, exclusive of any others.
The Constitution was created to be executed in equity among citizens, which is the absence of bias and favoritism among citizens.
Affirmative action and quotas are bias and favoritism, and, as such, are irrefutably unconstitutional.
Affirmative action, quotas, etc. must be abrogated.
Upstate, what Fani and Wade did was due to Democrat arrogance that is caused by never having the media confront them, investigate them or ask them the dreaded follow-up question.
This is the real privilege that exists in this country today, the privilege of being a liberal. One microcosm of this phenomenon is the way Trump and Biden have been dealt with regarding classified documents. Trump took papers from when he was PRESIDENT, kept them at a place that was SECRET SERVICE PROTECTED and was indicted for it. Biden took papers while he was a SENATOR and a VICE-PRESIDENT, kept them in his garage where is corrupt son has access and at the Penn Center that is funded by our gravest enemy, the CCP and he was not indicted.
This is life in Doublestandardstan and this is why, in my opinion, Fani and Wade, two attorneys, acted with such reckless disregard for their legal obligation, the optics and the threat to their case and their legal careers. They KNOW they will get this broomed.
“…No experience…yet paid more than any other expert..”
Republicans may want to recall Bush’s legal advisor Monica Goodling and FEMA Secretary Michael Brown.
Goodling graduated from a Christian-college, then with little experience tried to illegally purge and fire federal prosecutors at the U.S. Department of Justice of all government employees that were LGBTQ or not sufficiently loyal to Bush. Her mistake was having little experience then trying to fire America’s top legal experts.
Michael Brown was a commissioner at the International Arabian Horse Association. Naturally that made him he qualified for natural emergencies after 9/11 and following Hurricane Katrina. George W. Bush commented “Heck of a job Brownie” just before firing him.
Fani Willis looks very good compared to these Republican practices!
Both carried the requisite constitutional qualification.
But irrelevant to the facts that Wade had never tried a criminal case. His CV is down hill from that weak standing.
APROPOS OF NOTHING AND QUITE POSSIBLY OFF TOPIC
_______________________________________________________________
“I’M SCARED AS HECK!”
Kamala Harris has extensive experience in the kitchen, making salads.
Kamala Harris also has extensive experience in the bedroom, making Willy Brown, the very married with children Willy Brown.
Kamala Harris is a triple beneficiary of affirmative action, if you get my drift.
Ain’t America great?
Who needs to Make America Great Again?
“I’M SCARED AS HECK!”
“. . . recall Bush’s legal advisor . . .”
Well, at least it wasn’t: “But Trump . . .”
Anonymous, how is this relevant to a case where a PROSECUTOR is unqualified but us being paid by his lover to go after a former president.
PS. Why not discuss the Kennedy that was appointed as ambassador to Ireland because Obama needed some Kennedy cred for his standing.
SOVIET STYLE SHOW TRAILS MUST BE STRUCK DOWN
In its 1867 decision Mississippi v. Johnson, the Supreme Court established that the President is largely beyond the reach of the judiciary by holding that it could not direct President Andrew Johnson in how he exercised his “purely executive and political” powers.1 The Court stated, it had “no jurisdiction . . . to enjoin the President in the performance of his official duties.”2
– Congress.gov
_________________
Just as all presidents before Obama had two parents who were citizens at the time of the birth of the candidate, all past presidents have enjoyed presidential immunity.
Obama is ineligible and President Trump has full presidential immunity.
Fani Willis and her office are corrupt.
Joe Biden and his administration are corrupt.
Fani Willis and Joe Biden colluded to commit lawfare and bring political charges against their political opponent.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime.”
– Lavrentiy Beria
Roman’s counsel laid out what appears to be a good conflict of interest case against Fani. The documents filed with the motion are pretty damning, unless there’s good evidence to the contrary.
I can’t imagine what defenses Fani could raise aside from alleging that the trip payments by Wade were just loans (borrowing a theory from Hunter). We’ll have to see how this proceeds, but it sure has been unpredictable and interesting to follow.
If the allegations are true, the case is hopelessly tainted and would have to be removed. Perhaps another DA will want to revive some or all of it in another county.
Anyone want to hire a former DA from GA?
In the absence of Fani, I would have thought a judge would have to decide on reviving the case? It’s not like the DAs draw straws is it?
*Fani and Wade will be on the View by tomorrow a.m. Democrat/liberal rock stars by noon. And the DNCC will always have a special place of honor for them in their fight for freedom and Democracy .. . i.e. against the evils of Trump and Hitler.
Since Willis and Wade already met with the White House and Jan 6 Committee, my guess is that the decision to remove and proceed would involve them as well as some higher-ups from GA. I can’t imagine that they wouldn’t have to start at the beginning, with a fresh grand jury as well as prosecutor because if the case is tainted, it’s rotten all the way through. But what do I know — a lot more facts need to come out.
More Turley pearl-clutching. Since you hold yourself out as a law professor, Turley, why not comment on Trump’s attorney model who: 1. refuses to stand when addressing a federal judge, even after being admonished for failing to do so; 2. reading from a document before it was admitted into evidence, resulting in the judge admonishing her; 3. failing to lay a foundation when she tried to get the document admitted into evidence, causing the judge to comment that this was “Evidence 101”; 4. smart-mouthing the judge by commenting that she didn’t like the way he spoke to her and demanding that he refrain from continuing to do so. These things are not speculative–they happened. She is a total hack in the courtroom, and alumni from her law school say she makes the whole school look bad.
On the other hand, all of the things you wrote about Fani Willis have yet to be proven. How sadly typical.
” yet to be proven”. She does not dispute the accusations.
Edwardmahl: Willis has not directly addressed the FACTS, but she DOES dispute that she engaged in any improper conduct. You need to stop watching (non) NewsMax.
Perhaps this partisan hack judge is just getting the lack of respect that they deserve…
He isn’t a “partisan hack judge,” and it’s unprofessional for a lawyer to be disrespectful. More importantly, Habba is showing herself to be incompetent when it comes to the rules of federal procedure, and in so many words, she’s disgustingly accusing EJC of liking the rape attention.