Falsehoods that, for example, in these Text Messages that were purposely leaked to the media as it relates to ms williss daughter subjecting her her position in school, that she flunked out of college, which isnt true. Which in fact she has graduated from an hbcu. But whats been leaked to the media is the fact that she flunked out of school and someone other than her father moved her, which again, the validity of which was never shown and all the while ms willis facing these costs has been able to continue to do the work unrelated to this case, which is shown in the fact that land is murder rate and Violent Crime rates have decreased. Why she has been in office what was shown through the testimony of all of the witnesses and through the evidence that your honor heard, was that there wasnt an actual conflict that the defense failed to provide any sort of actual conflict in relation to ms wades . I guess the relationship that transpired from other relationship between her and mr. Wade, and that there was actually no evidence of a financial benefit that she gained as it relates to the prosecution of this case. And the ultimate outcome of the case. The corroboration of all of that is the things that your honour is very much aware that she could have. I guess financially benefited from stretching out the case for lack of better words by the grand jury or the special grand jury recommended the 39 individuals be indicted, but through her sifting through the special grand jury hes a report and all of the evidence with the team that indicted the case. They only went with 19 of the defendants, which had she gone to 30. Ive done with all 39. Theres there based on the Defense Counsels assertions what have given her the opportunity to certainly find these financial gains that are claimed through the allegations of Defense Council more importantly, why would ms willis repeatedly asked this court has set a trial date as soon as possible. If her motive in prosecuting this case was to continue to financially game as allege from the prosecution of the case it doesnt line up. It doesnt make sense and it doesnt make sense for a reason because it doesnt exist more importantly this office has several, multiple rico and as well as large scale cases like this one and much larger. And they also, theres a lot of high profile prosecutions. If ms wades or excuse me, ms willis is ultimate goal by hiring mr. Wade was for her financial benefit, then she would put mr. Wade on every single one of those cases. Though she could certainly a rebel in the riches and lavish lifestyle that has been referred to by Defense Counsel which theres been absolutely no evidence of. The evidence was she stated the doubletree and Napa A Doubletree i dont know that to be a lavish hotel. Most people, when they go to napa, if they want to lavishly experience napa, stay at the ritzcarlton, the four seasons, things of that nature, not a doubletree so the allegations and assertions that ms willis was living the lifestyle of the rich and the famous is a joke absolute joke as it relates to what youve heard. And the secondary issue is the Forensic Misconduct. And for lack of better words what it has to be shown is that the statements that were made by for heat here, ms willis, related to the prosecution of the case and ultimately the guilt or innocence of the defendants. And we have none of those statements. Theres been no evidence, nothing has provided to your been provided to your honor, as it relates to ms willis less specific statements made about any of the defendants and in relation to the guilt or innocence of any of the defendants i forget which Defense Counsel referenced the fact that she said she had a 95 Conviction Rate. Well, what ms willis has job is to instill confidence in the community as to how to how well she is doing as relates to her constitutional duties. And that was exactly what was done when she referenced that she had a 95 Conviction Rate in the Previous Year that she was serving as the District Attorney. More importantly its been the allegations about race and religion being imputed in her speech and that those comments were directed at the defendants at this table. And if you listen to the speech, those comments are directed at two elected or political officials. I believe it was Marjorie Taylor greene and ms bridgette thorne, who is a member of the Fulton County board of commissioners here. Shes specifically use their names. I dont i dont know that they my knowledge is theyre not supposed to be sitting at the table and i havent seen them in my work as it relates to this case. Your honor. So those allegations that ms willis committed a Forensic Misconduct are again, theres no validity to them. Theres no evidence of them as it relates to any of those comments at which this is an issue that judge mcburney has previously ruled on when these same allegations were alleged as. It relates to extra judicial statements made by ms willis. And it involved a statement that the words fake electors were said by ms willis and he found there was absolutely no conduct that was impermissive impermissible as it relates to Forensic Misconduct and i guess, to drive home the point at no point in any of the statements that were made, and that were that were on that are alleged here as it relates to speech that she made at the church at no point did she mentioned the guilt or innocence of any of the defendants she again, was merely responding to comments made by Marjorie Taylor greene and Bridget Thorn to other political officials therefore, making her comments not even close in the realm of any sort of Forensic Misconduct what i find interesting is that Defense Counsel wants to make these allegations that ms willis committed this Forensic Misconduct by the statements that she made in her defense to unrelated officials criticized the job that she would fined by policy. Interesting of a sense that weve had pretty you propers relief hes to the media by Defense Counsel, emailed council, released to the media side. Defense counsel statements have been made by Defense Counsel in relation to this case. We had the unredacted version of the Cell Phone Records of mr. Wade released to the media by Defense Counsel with his private and personal inference formation causing the threat of harm to both ms willis and mr. Wade to increase, we the most recent instance was the Text Messages that your honor hadnt ruled on their admissibility prior to their release, and it was made clear during the hearings that the ability to get those the full chain was something that they were unable to do but they figured a way. And the minute they figured a way they released it, the information to the media simultaneously with turning it over to the state and the court for all the reasons obviously stated before, your honor, this motion should be not beat, should be denied because the legal requirements by that are required in order for the District Attorney to be disqualified, have not been satisfied. The defendants have failed hello. To raise any issues legally or factually to satisfy the Legal Standard for disqualification. They must show an actual conflict. Theyve been unable to show that the prosecution of this case was it all result of political bias, which has been accused or accusations have made, as well as demonstrated that the prosecution of this case was motivated by any means or any way because of malicious prosecution. And they havent been able to prove that this case was one of selective prosecution for political benefit or gain. All allegations that have been made during the course of different hearings. And the procedures as it relates to this case what i would leave the court with, how the state started the argument is that courts have been generally unreceptive, if not hostile, to attempt to disqualify prosecutors based on pervasive and institutional conflicts, which makes clear that the burden that the standard is very, very high, that must be met in order for a district in elected District Attorney to be disqualified. And that burden that standard has not been met. An actual conflict has not been shown. And more importantly, are in conjunction with that, there has been absolutely no evidence for the District Attorney has benefitted financially at all, but benefited financially and Congestion Function with any outcome, whether it be now or ultimately, as it relates to the prosecution of this case. And because of all those reasons, your honor, we would respectfully request you denied Defense Councils motion to disqualify the elected District Attorney, ms fani willis thank you, mr. Body thats what it says. Mr. Cromwell ill use okay. Hitting. Understood. Mr. Sadow. All yours im going to do. Rebuttal specific rebuttal one state somehow makes an argument that we should have asked mr. Wade questions about his relationship and his communications with mr. Bradley when they objected over and over and over. And aides counsel objected over and over and over claiming that every thing that bradley was told by wade was attorneyclient privilege your honor, made determinations thereafter to bradley. We didnt get the opportunity to call mr. Wade back to the stand. So to claim that you cant impeach him because you didnt ask him when they objected to as ask him is a obviously is a false position to take as disingenuous as it can be now, if the court wants to open it up well be more than happy to call mr. Wade back to the stand. But as the record stands, there could be no confrontation of mr. Wade when both his counsel and the state are arguing that it shouldnt be done second lets lets use Little Common sense here Forensic Misconduct received about two minutes worth of discussion the rest of it is all long conflict Forensic Misconduct dealing with the way the statement is, if you dont accuse someone or you dont say that someones guilty. Assuming you can impugn someones character the degree that constitutes Forensic Misconduct. Why is that . Im sorry. Assuming you can impugn someones character to the degree that it constitutes Forensic Misconduct i think that i guess the states primary position was that they werent talking about you at that church, right. And if you go listen to it and watch it, it starts off by saying why does commissioner Bridget Thorn and so many others . And then it refers to they attack him for being black. They attack him not anyone else. Just the attack the black man, youre not talking about . This thorn or Marjorie Taylor greene, theyre talking about us. And you know how Everybody Knows that because not a single story from the media reported anything other than fani willis accused the defense and defendants are being racist. Now, heres the common sense part of this. If you follow the states position on Forensic Misconduct fani willis could all day long talk about race. She could say the defendants, im not saying theyre guilty or not guilty, but their races theyre racist. Theyre racist. And according to the states position on Forensic Misconduct, that wouldnt be a problem. Obviously, that makes no sense whatsoever. The issue here that weve dealt with on forensic this conduct is not simply the church speech. Its why she did it how she did it, calculated, and all the other things that we talked about with the testimony of wade and willis in this case . Lets go to the relationship issues in the cell phones. Briefly no one knew that there was a relationship between wade and willis according to wade and willis not a soul was ever told that they were dating or that there was an intimate relationship, ever they conceal it from all parties, from daddy. Daddy didnt even know they had a relationship suggest that somehow in the beginning of 2021, january 2 whatever it was, an into april that they couldnt have met in hatefilled they didnt meet anywhere that would allow the public to see them. Thats the reason why they were meeting at yearties because no one else was ever very remember the testimony. Who else was there besides mr. Wade . And ms willis . Both of them agreed . No one no one ever went there except them. They didnt go to where daddy was in. Ms willis is house because that he was there and daddy would know no other prosecutors knew. No one knows except who . The one person that knew was bradley and yeartie. Year t was the best friend at that time with ms willis. Bradley, was the partner of wade now the only way that wade can walk, im sorry, the only way that bradley can walk away from the a, very long time step that lets go to something motive. Thats it an issue whose motive in this case is the strongest fani willis. And wade, because if they if they testified truthfully on every point, what happens if the relationship started before november 1 . They get disqualified. Who has the best motive of anyone to lie . They do. Who has the most at stake to lie . They do who once to stay on this case for whatever the financial reason may be, they do. And thank you, mr. Santa there it is all right. Thank you, everybody i think has been very much made clear by the argument and the made today is that there are several legal issues to sort through, several factual determinations that i have to make those are ones i can make at this moment. And so i will be taking the time to make sure that i give this case for consideration is do i hope to have an answer for everyone within the next two weeks . And l that point if there any other issues that come up, counsel can reach out and well have an order posted on the docket thank you. All were off the record youve been listening to the judge there in georgia, judge scott mcafee, who says he will make his decision in about two weeks. Thats the max time he gave there on whether or not the District Attorney in this case, fani willis, will be ultimately disqualified. It is not an overstatement to say that the prosecution of donald trump in the state of georgia hangs on what you have just been listening to. That last person there who is speaking to the court with steve sadow. That is Donald Trumps attorney here. But shortly before that, we heard from the prosecution as the chief deputy District Attorney was arguing against the disqualification of his boss, fani willis, who i should note was sitting behind members of her staff as the judge has now weighing her fate in this case. Welcome to the lead. Im Kaitlan Collins in for jake tapper on this friday. Fani willis, of course, is the woman who charged trump with attempting to overturn the 2020 election in the state of georgia, along with a slew of codefendants whose attorneys were also in that room. But now she herself is facing allegations of an improper relationship when the Special Prosecutor that she put on that case, if wallace has just qualified the case, could very well not happen. A, lot is at stake here i want to bring in cnns chief legal analyst anchor laura coates, whos and watching every moment of this hearing has been an atlanta as part of this has been going on as well laura, i mean, the stakes here are so incredibly high now that we do have the Closing Arguments. And this is really in scott mcafee, his hands, the judge here, whats your sense of how today went for each side . Oh, the stakes are unbelievably high. Were talking about an 18 originally codefendant case, which also include the former president of the United States. Take a step back as to why were here. This is not the prosecutors burden to prove that they should stay in the case. It is the is the people who actually brought this Motion Disqualifier to prove she ought to be as quality by now, heres two ways you can be disqualified. Kaitlan. One, its called Forensic Misconduct. That essentially is saying that you had a financial benefit that you derived from a Conflict Of Interest that actually impacts the ability for a defendant to get a fair trial. The other way and get his qualifies. If you have a personal stake in the outcome of the case hey, therefore, you cant actually be objective any longer. So they were focusing really on the Forensic Misconduct aspect of it and theyre saying, look, ethical violations are enough, ethical violations are enough to get someone whos qualified and the real point here was about whether the appearance of a conflict there is enough or is the actual conflict . Enough to do it . Which one will it be . You heard some really riveting testimony and arguments that were made by both sides of the issue today, there were focused on that very central issue, but ultimately, the people who moved to actually have her disqualified say she should not be credited. Shes not credible her and nathan wade were lying. Were getting too cutesy on the stand trying to be evasive because they called the original sin that attempt to keep their