Judge Scott McAfee will hear what is expected to be final arguments this afternoon on motions to disqualify DA Fani Willis based on allegations that she benefited financially from a romantic relationship with prosecutor Nathan Wade.

Both Willis and Wade testified their relationship began after he was hired for the case in 2021, and that Willis reimbursed Wade in cash for vacations they took that were booked on his credit card.

Defense lawyers initially argued that Wade's former law partner and divorce lawyer, Terrence Bradley, would contradict Wade and Willis' claim on the stand about when the relationship began, but Bradley instead testified earlier this week that any past statements he made to that effect were "speculation on my part."

Bradley, according to text messages read in court, previously told defense attorney Ashleigh Merchant -- who led the charge on the disqualification effort -- that Willis and Wade's relationship began long before he was hired, raising potential credibility issues for Judge McAfee to consider.

"Absolutely," Bradley wrote Merchant in a text message read in court. "[The relationship] started when she left the DAS office and was judge in South Fulton."

Judge McAfee had left open the possibility that he could "reopen" the evidentiary process after both the defense and state submitted motions containing new evidence, telling them they could both "proffer" their evidence at the hearing and that he would make a determination.

Trump's attorney are seeking to admit data from Nathan Wade's cellphone they say shows Wade in the area of Willis' home dozens of times before he was hired, which the state disputes. The state is also seeking to enter an affidavit from a winery employee they say will back up Willis' claims that she paid for her and Wade's excursions in cash.

After more than two hours, Tuesday's hearing concluded without providing any revelatory information about the timeline of the romantic relationship between Fulton County prosecutor Nathan Wade and DA Fani Willis, which the defense contends started before Wade was hired, in contrast to what both Wade and Willis have testified.

Judge Scott McAfee said that he plans to hear arguments from the parties on Friday about the case for Willis' disqualification so he can try to make a ruling.

"At this point, I need to start hearing the arguments and the law and what we've heard so far. If I think I'm able to reach a ruling based on that, I will," McAfee said.

He added that the parties could push to continue presenting evidence if needed.

"The intention is that we're still sticking with the argument," McAfee said. "But the parties are free to address some of these issues that have been brought up, post-hearing, if they'd like to."

Following a break, the state declined to question prosecutor Nathan Wade's former attorney Terrence Bradley after the defense wrapped up their questioning.

Bradley has stepped down from the stand after approximately two hours of testimony.

The parties are now debating Bradley's text messages being entered as evidence.

The state is claiming that Bradley did not authenticate the entire text message exchange, and has asked the judge to parse through it to determine its relevance to the case.

Prosecutor Nathan Wade's former attorney Terrence Bradley described his past statements as "speculation" when Donald Trump's attorney Steve Sadow confronted him with past text messages Bradley exchanged with another defense attorney that appeared inconsistent with his current testimony.

"That's speculation on my part," Bradley said. "I stated that I was speculating."

Sadow showed him past text messages where Bradley said Wade and DA Fani Willis "absolutely" began their relationship before Wade was hired by Willis.

"It started when she left the DAs office and was [a] judge in South Fulton. They met at the Municipal Court CLE conference," Bradley said in a text message that was entered into evidence.

Claiming he was speculating in that text, Bradley reiterated that he does not have direct information about when the relationship began. He said that between 2018 and 2022, he only spoke with Wade about the relationship once.

"I do not know when the relationship started between Mr. Wade and Ms. Willis. I cannot recall that," Bradley said.

"Is it your testimony that you don't know, under oath, whether or not there was a relationship between Mr. Wade and Ms. Willis, before the contract?" Sadow asked, referring to Wade's November 2021 contract with the DA.

"I do not recall any dates of when the relationship started," Bradley responded.

Sadow, however, appeared incredulous of Bradley and hammered at his claim.

"That's the true explanation because you don't want to admit it in court, correct?" Sadow said.

Bradley did not change his account of the relationship, despite Sadow's repeated questions.

Sadow ultimately concluded his questions by reminding Bradley about the stakes of his testimony.

"You realize that if you were to testify under oath that you knew from Mr. Wade that the relationship between him and Miss Willis existed before the contract on November 1 of 2021 ... that would show that both Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade had lied under oath. You know that don't you?" Sadow said, prompting a sustained objection.