The hearing has resumed after a short break, with state attorneys now presenting their closing arguments.

DA Fani Willis is seated at the prosecution table, along with other prosecutors including Nathan Wade.

DA Fani Willis, who was not present for the early afternoon arguments, has entered the courtroom.

She entered while the court was on a short break and took a seat at the prosecutors' table.

Court will resume following the break.

Earlier, the defense attorney for ex-DOJ official Jeffrey Clark told the judge that the DA's office has put an "irreparable stain" on the case and are now a "global laughingstock."

"Think of the message that would be sent if they were not disqualified," attorney Harry MacDougald told the judge. "If this is tolerated, we'll get more of it. This office is a global laughingstock because of their conduct. They should be disqualified and the case should be dismissed."

MacDougald argued that Willis has six different conflicts of interest in the case, "any one of which warrants disqualification." He alleged the conflicts include a financial conflict, the speech at the church, and her "pattern of deceit and concealment," among others.

"The problem here is that the DA cannot distinguish between her personal interests and ambitions on the one hand, and her public duties as a prosecutor on the other," MacDougald said. "And apparently neither can anyone else in their office."

Richard Rice, the attorney for Trump co-defendant Robert Cheeley, also argued that the volume of alleged texts and calls between Willis and Wade proves their romantic relationship began prior to Wade receiving his job with the DA office.

DA Fani Willis engaged in a "calculated plan ... to prejudice the defendants in this case in the minds of the jurors" when she defended herself and Nathan Wade during a speech at an Atlanta-area church in January, according to Craig Gillen, an attorney for defendant David Schafer.

During her remarks at the church, Willis repeatedly referred to herself as "flawed" and "imperfect" -- but did not directly acknowledge her relationship with Wade.

Gillen argued that her "deflection" strategy at the church merits disqualification because it could improperly "inject" race into the case, which might compromise the impartiality of the prospective jury pool.

"She chose to play the race card and the God card … to deflect away from the allegations" in the motion for disqualification, Gillen said. "She chose to inject race into the minds of the listeners."

Judge McAfee initially appeared skeptical of this argument, asking Gillen directly whether he could cite other instances in Georgia where a prosecutor had been dismissed based on their public commentary on a case.

"Thank goodness it doesn't happen very often," Gillen replied. "Sadly, it's already happened here."

"Prosecutors don't act like this, lawyers don't act like this … and they need to go," Gillen said.

Adam Abbate, an attorney with the district attorney's office, argued that defendants had failed to meet the "high standard of proof" for disqualification -- calling the narrative they spun about Willis and Wade's relationship "absolutely absurd."

"It doesn't make any sense," Abbate said. "The motions to disqualify should be denied, and Miss Willis as district attorney of Fulton County, and Mr. Wade, as the special prosecutor assigned to this case, should be allowed to remain on this case and continue to prosecute the case."

Contrary to what defense attorneys argued, Abbate argued that they must prove an "actual conflict" of interest to secure a disqualification -- not just the "appearance of impropriety."

"The defense has to show an actual conflict, and in this instance, they have to show in the actual conflict would be that Miss Willis received a financial benefit or gain -- and got it based upon the outcome of the case," Abbate said.

"We have absolutely no evidence that Miss Willis received any financial gain or benefit," he argued. "The testimony was that Miss Willis paid all of the money back in cash as related to the trips."

Judge McAfee seemed skeptical of that argument, citing language that allows for removal based on the "appearance of impropriety" and referencing examples of past misconduct raised by the defendants.

Abbate pushed back, arguing that in each of those cases, the "appearance of impropriety ... arose from the fact that the court found an actual conflict in each of those cases."

Abbate also called into question the credibility of defendants' key witnesses in the disqualification hearings, calling the testimony of Robin Yeartie, ex-friend of Willis, "at best inconsistent."