Conflicts of interest only get you kicked off the case if you’re not in Trump’s pocket. If you ARE in Trump’s pocket, then the conflict of interest is a feature and you stay on the case.
You really haven’t been paying attention. There haven’t been any delays or complexities in this case before this. Things were on schedule for a trial this summer and four codefendants have already entered guilty pleas.
Worst case scenario is Willis, and her entire office, are removed from the case. It is not clear who would take over from there because the Attorney General has his own conflict. The person who does take over could just drop the charges if they so chose.
Furthermore, in May of 2023 Georgia passed a law that allows an oversight committee to remove local DAs like Willis. The legislature made some noise about removing her when she brought charges, but ultimately held off. This might be all the cover they need even if the accusations against her turn out to be baseless.
It doesn’t weaken the case against Trump one bit. He unambiguously broke Georgia law. Willis’s actions don’t change what Trump did and what Trump did was unambiguously break the law. That’s clear from the indictment and the guilty pleas of his codefendants.
Can those guilty pleas be withdrawn if this is enough to remove Willis from the case?
At the very least, if Willis is indeed removed from the case, it would cause massive delays I’m sure. Another prosecutor would have to get caught up before it could go any further.
I’m hoping this is just an attempt to muddy the waters with allegations absent proof. That’s not anything that Trump’s legal teams have hesitated to try so it wouldn’t shock me. But I’m also not confident that it’s bogus.
Roman’s lawyer, Ashleigh Merchant, said she reviewed the case file in Wade’s ongoing divorce proceedings at the Superior Court Clerk’s Office and made copies of certain documents. But the case file was later improperly sealed because no court hearing was held as required by law, the motion said.
Because the case remains under seal, Merchant said she is not sharing the information she obtained from the divorce file until the seal is lifted. She also said she is asking a judge to unseal the case file.
Emphasis added
That’s an awful long way to say “two weeks.”
Not sure what the transgression is…was Wade improperly hired / engaged, or was he qualified? Does a relationship with someone preclude his hiring? Maybe it does.
The bit about her enjoying a financial benefit from the $$$ he received seems like a leap, absent additional details. I think I read that he received $600+K. Willis allegedly went on “lavish vacations” with Wade. Isn’t money fungible? Let’s say they went on a couple of high-end vacations, and he paid $50K. Is the allegation that he took her on vacation as payback, and the trips would not have occurred otherwise? If they had a relationship, couldn’t they have taken trips even if he had never been hired?
I need more info. The facts as represented (not interpreted) could be 100% accurate and still be a nothing burger, right?
This is an excellent point. I’m not sure how we get from hiring someone she has a personal relationship to a conflict that disqualifies her from prosecuting the case.
Here’s an Atlanta Journal-Constitution article that quotes local experts on both sides of the issue: Could Willis allegations sink Trump case? Legal experts weigh in
Andrew Fleischman, a criminal defense attorney in Atlanta, said if the allegations are true the arrangement would be a clear violation of the State Bar of Georgia’s code of ethics for lawyers.
“If you are giving money to somebody who appears to be unqualified, and they are giving you some of that money back in the form of summer vacations, then you’re financially benefiting from your prosecution,” he said. “That’s a conflict of interest.”
When asked Tuesday about the situation, Fulton County Commission Chairman Rob Pitts seemed to agree.
“Typically the county attorney recommends outside counsel to the board of commissioners for approval in civil matters — that’s the distinction,” he said. “This situation involves a special prosecutor. And with respect to a special prosecutor, the district attorney has the authority and the right to hire such a person.”
More in the article.
How is this any different from what Clarence Thomas has been doing for the last 20 years?
As for who takes over the case.
Judges appoint lawyers for the defense all the time. Can’t the judge simply appoint one for the “people of Georgia”?
Seems reasonable.
Unless the judge appoints his cousin, which at this point, wouldn’t surprise me.
Has anyone alleged that Wade is unqualified, though? That seems to be the key point in the Fleischman quote, and I don’t think it applies.
It’s in the (127 page) filing I linked to upthread.
Undersigned counsel knows the special prosecutor and has researched his litigation experience. That research reveals that the special prosecutor has never tried a felony RICO case. The State of Georgia and the City of Atlanta has several lawyers who specialize in the prosecuting and defending RICO cases. Despite having access to these resources, why would the district attorney, instead, appoint someone who has never tried a felony RICO case, particularly in a case with such national significance as this one?
The special prosecutor, based on his lack of experience in this type of felony, would not be qualified under Fulton County’s standards to be appointed to represent any defendant in this case given the complexity of the charges. If the special prosecutor is not qualified to defend this case under Fulton County’s standards, then how is he qualified to prosecute the case? Is that why the district attorney did not seek approval for his appointment? If so, why did she seek to appoint an unqualified lawyer without approval to preside over this prosecution?
There may be more on this. I didn’t read the whole thing.
Beyond what Lance Turbo posted above, it looks like New York Times reporters Nicholas Bogel-Burroughs and Richard Fausset think it:
Lawyer Tapped to Prosecute Trump in Georgia Is Now Under Scrutiny Himself
Any attorney who has ever prosecuted a RICO case has to have had a first time they did so. I’m unimpressed with the “they’ve never done that before” argument.
That is not to say that there is nothing to these allegations, but I don’t like that particular criticism.
I’m just going to wait and see what the truth turns out to be, if that’s even possible anymore in this country.
I’m skeptical just because of the “cry wolf” factor — it’s not the first time they’ve tried to smear Ms. Willis with sexual allegations, even though I’ve never heard a Republican suggest that, for example, Harlan Crow’s lavish gifts to Clarence Thomas was an indication of a sexual relationship between the two men.
I don’t believe Allison Greenfield had an inappropriate relationship with Chuck Schumer, either.
And I’m not bothered by Nathan Wades lack of prosecutorial experience, simply because his role seemed to be primarily investigative and the special grand jury he convened wasn’t even authorized to bring charges, so I don’t see prosecutorial experience as being particularly important. And I’m not even sure they knew they had a RICO case BEFORE they did the investigation. Remember, Willis is the prosecutor on the RICO case, not Wade.
And I’m not even judging the vacations without more info, as I know that professional conferences are frequently held in resort type locations.
But mostly, don’t you think if Wade was so supremely unqualified someone would’ve noticed in the past two and a half years? The fact that the two prosecutors knew and trusted each other isn’t inappropriate despite what the gaslighters say, and it looks to me like Wade had experience with high profile investigations and based on that, was an appropriate hire.
Amazing that they also think what he did was good when he sexually assaulted E. Jean Carrol. I have to seriously wonder about the morality of his followers, especially the evangelical ones.
I saw an article that Trump retwuthed on his failing social media site, and the big Fani Willis / Nathan Wade scandal du jour is that Wade’s law firm billed the state for $6000 for one days work.
Which would actually be totally normal and unsurprising for a days work by a partner working with a small team of associates and paralegals. Once again, they pandering to their low rent base that doesn’t understand how law forms bill.
I wonder how much Trump’s lawyers bill him for a day in court? I bet it’s more than 6K, by several orders of magnitude.
ETA - Another point, this one about the right wing types going on about all the lawyers and prosecutors that are more qualified than Wade….
The legal system in general is pretty overworked and understaffed these days, so I’m not sure why there is an assumption that all these highly qualified people were available. Or an assumption that they were willing to take the job……frankly, I bet a lot of lawyers wouldn’t be interested, because of the tearing apart of their personal lives and constant death threats and sexual harassment of their wives and daughters. It takes a person with a certain kind of fortitude to take that on voluntarily and I’m not sure how common that is.
No need to wonder.
“retwuthed”??
When Twitter was a thing (before it was rebranded X), sharing a tweet or post was known as re-tweeting.
When DJT started Truth Social, the posts were called “truths” rather than “tweets”. Sharing one is called re-truthing. Calling it a “retwuth” is its own thing that I assume is comparing DJT to Elmer Fudd or just mocking him as a child or something.