Fulton County District Attorney and Lead Prosecutor Respond to Allegations of Improper Conduct in Georgia Election Case
In a recent court filing, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and her lead prosecutor, Nathan Wade, have addressed the allegations of improper conduct and a conflict of interest in the Georgia election case. The filing comes as a response to claims made by one of former President Donald Trump’s co-defendants, who accused Willis of financially benefiting from her relationship with Wade.
Willis and Wade both acknowledge the existence of a “personal” relationship but vehemently deny any financial gain on Willis’s part. Wade stated in an affidavit that their personal relationship developed in 2022, but his earnings from the case were not shared with or provided to Willis. He emphasized that the District Attorney received no funds or personal financial gain from his position as Special Prosecutor.
Similarly, Willis stated that their personal relationship has never involved any direct or indirect financial benefit to her. She filed the response to the allegations, asserting that they do not meet the legal grounds required for her disqualification from the Georgia election interference case. Willis argued that the defense attorneys failed to establish any financial or personal conflict of interest on her part that would warrant disqualification.
The motion also defended Wade’s qualifications, dismissing the attacks on him as factually inaccurate, unsupported, and malicious. It stated that there is no evidence of any action taken by the District Attorney or her staff that deviates from their role as officers of the law overseeing the investigation and prosecution of the defendants.
The judge overseeing the criminal case has ordered Willis to respond to the allegations, leading to a scheduled hearing on February 15. Willis, Wade, and their colleagues may be required to testify after receiving subpoenas. Addressing allegations of taking vacations together, Willis clarified that the financial responsibility for personal travel is divided evenly between them, with expenses paid for with individual personal funds.
In his affidavit, Wade confirmed that he has made travel arrangements for both himself and District Attorney Willis at times, while Willis has done the same from her personal funds. Willis emphasized that there are no joint or shared finances or financial accounts between them and that they are not financially reliant on each other.
Citing Wade’s affidavit, Willis argued that the exercise of prosecutorial discretion in the case was not impacted by their personal relationship. She stated that the existence of a relationship between members of a prosecution team does not entitle a criminal defendant to any remedy without additional factors.
Wade was initially hesitant to take on the work as Special Prosecutor due to concerns about violent rhetoric and potential safety issues for his family. However, he eventually agreed to assist in the investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
Despite the distractions caused by the allegations, Willis has no plans to step down from the election subversion case. Her decision is driven in part by the concern that her departure could effectively end the case, as it remains uncertain if there is another prosecutor in Georgia willing to take it on.
The alleged affair was first raised by Trump’s co-defendant, Mike Roman, who accused Willis of financially benefiting from Wade’s actions. However, the initial filing lacked direct evidence to support these claims. Subsequently, credit card statements revealed in Wade’s divorce case showed that he paid for two plane tickets for Willis. The trial date for Trump and the 14 remaining co-defendants has not yet been set, but Willis has requested a date be scheduled for August.
As this story develops, it is important to note that Willis and Wade strongly deny any wrongdoing and maintain that their personal relationship does not compromise the integrity of the case. The upcoming hearing on February 15 will provide further insights into the allegations and their impact on the ongoing litigation.
