Special prosecutor Nathan Wade is now on the stand.

Fulton County prosecutors made a motion to quash the subpoena for Wade to testify, but Judge Scott McAfee rejected the motion, saying the "evidence in front of the court at the moment" is that a witness testified that the relationship predated his hiring, which contradicts their court filing.

"I don't see a way around the relevance of his testimony," said the judge.

Trump's attorney Steve Sadow drilled down into the testimony from Former DA office employee Robin Yeartie that Willis told her repeatedly that she and Wade were in a relationship before he was hired in 2021.

"Told you that in the year of 2020?" Sadow asked.

"Yes," Yeartie said.

"In the year of 2021?" Sadow asked.

"Yes," Yeartie said.

"Are you certain that Mrs. Willis told you about the romantic relationship with Mr. Wade prior to November 1 of 2021?, Sadow asked.

"Yes," Yeartie said.

Yeartie also testified she saw them "hugging, kissing, just affection."

All before he was hired?

"Yes," Yeartie said.

Former DA office employee Robin Yeartie testified that Fani Willis and Nathan Wade began dating prior to the Trump election interference case -- contradicting the claim in the state's court filing that the relationship started after Wade was hired.

"You know their personal relationship began shortly after" they met at a conference in October 2019, attorney Merchant asked the witness.

The witness, who said she was a old friend of Willis, replied, "Yes."

Yeartie is testifying via Zoom after she didn't appear in the courtroom.

The state is objecting to questions from the defense seemingly at every chance they can, which is significantly slowing down the proceedings. The judge has remained patient, but Michael Roman's attorney Ashleigh Merchant appears to be growing frustrated with the state's strategy.

Terrance Bradley, a former law partner of Nathan Wade, is declining to answer questions about Fani Willis and Wade's relationship, citing attorney-client privilege.

"I was advised by the bar … I cannot reveal anything that I saw or learned," Bradley said. "I am here because I also have a law license and I'm not trying to lose that."

The judge pushed back, saying, "That's a broader representation of attorney-client privilege than I've ever heard."

The debate has drawn the first comments from Donald Trump's attorney Steve Sadow, who said of Bradley's view of attorney-client privilege, "There is no such case law."

Sadow even suggested Bradley be held in contempt if he continues to refuse to answer questions.

DA Fani Willis's office on Tuesday urged the judge to reject the disqualification effort against her, arguing in a filing that Trump and his co-defendants failed to meet the "high" standard required by law to disqualify an elected district attorney.

Willis' office, in the filing, told the judge the law requires him to find a "high standard of proof" that she has an actual conflict of interest or that she engaged in forensic misconduct -- which she says she did not do. She urged the judge to reject the arguments from Trump and others that the judge can disqualify her based solely on an appearance of a conflict.

"The binding caselaw in Georgia is clear: a trial court is not authorized to disqualify an elected district attorney absent a showing," the filing states. "Every Georgia case that has addressed the issue has reached the same conclusion: in order to authorize a trial court to disqualify an elected district attorney, an actual conflict of interest must be proven."

The filing said Trump and some of his co-defendants have asked the judge to instead to adopt a "novel" legal standard for disqualification "that has never before been recognized in Georgia."

"But no such standard exists under our law," the filing states.

The filing also emphasized that, based on the law, any alleged benefit a prosecutor received must be material, writing that a "nebulous" benefit that is not directly tied to the outcome of the case "is not enough to warrant disqualification."

"Here, the Defendants have not even alleged -- and certainly have not proven --that the District Attorney received any benefit contingent upon the outcome of this case," the filing said.