Fulton County hearing: Trump case hangs in balance as judge mulls DA Willis' disqualification

The defense wants to disqualify DA Fani Willis in Trump's Georgia election case.

Following three days of testimony plus closing arguments, Scott McAfee, the judge overseeing former President Donald Trump's Georgia election interference case, is weighing motions to disqualify Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, primarily over accusations from Trump co-defendant Michael Roman that she benefited financially from a "personal, romantic relationship" with prosecutor Nathan Wade, who she hired for the case.

Willis and Wade, in a court filing, admitted to the relationship but said it "does not amount to a disqualifying conflict of interest" and that the relationship "has never involved direct or indirect financial benefit to District Attorney Willis."


0

Willis walks in unannounced, then takes stand

As attorneys were arguing over DA Fani Willis' testimony, Willis surprised the court by walking into the courtroom unannounced, and prosecutors withdrew their motion to quash the subpoena for her testimony.

The DA then took the stand.


Wade testified his income decreased with case

Under questioning from an attorney with the DA's office, prosecutor Nathan Wade testified that his income decreased after signing on to work with Fulton County, and that he had to work "so many hours" that he couldn't get paid for.

"In 2022, your estimated monthly income at that time was $14,000 a month?" special prosecutor Anna Cross asked.

"Yes," Wade replied.

"In 2023, what did that number come to?" asked Cross.

"$9,500," Wade said.

When asked about the hours Wade worked that he didn't get paid for due to a cap, because of a cap, Wade said there were "so many hours" that he worked that he couldn't get paid for.

"This invoice makes me cry," Wade said. "There's so many hours here that I worked that I couldn't I couldn't get paid for."

"This is not the type of job that you can walk away from just because you're not getting paid for it," Wade said.


Wade asked about visiting Willis' condo

Trump's attorney Steve Sadow asked Wade about visiting Willis' Atlanta-area condo before November 2021, which would have been prior to his getting a contract with the DA office.

"Did you and Ms. Willis go to the Hapeville condo prior to Nov. 1, 2021?" Sadow asked.

"Yes," said Wade, who said he "maybe went to talk about a document that I received."

Sadow then asked Wade if phone records showed Wade made calls from Willis' condo prior to November 2021 ,would they be wrong.

"Yes sir," Wade replied.

Asked what other reasons phone records would show him making calls from that area if they were not made from Willis' apartment, Wade pointed to the airport near Hapeville.


Wade testifies divorce timing was a coincidence

Donald Trump's attorney Steve Sadow asked Nathan Wade why he filed his divorce after being hired by Fulton County.

"Can you answer the question why you waited until Nov. 2, the day after you were hired by Miss Willis. to file for divorce?" asked Sadow.

"I can't," Wade replied.

Wade explained that because his ex-wife had relocated to Texas, he was only able to serve her the divorce papers when she returned to Georgia.

"It was purely by coincidence that I filed the day after the contract with the DA's office," Wade said.


Trump attorney presses Bradley on dates of relationship

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.