Subjecting her position in school, that she flunked out of college, which is not true. She graduated from an hbcu but what has been leaked is the fact she flunked out of school and someone other than her father moved her, the validity of which was never shown. All the while, she is facing these costs and has been able to continue to do the work unrelated to this case, which is shown in the fact that a land as murder rate and Violent Crime rates have decreased while she has been in office. What was shown through the testimony of all of the witnesses and the evidence that your honor heard was that there wasnt an actual conflict. The district failed the relationship that transpired from the relationship between her and mr. Wade and there was no evidence of a financial benefit she gained as it relates to the prosecution of this case and the ultimate outcome of the case. The corroboration of all of that our things your honor is aware of. She could have financially benefited from stretching out the case, for lack of a better word by the special grand jury, we recommended the 39 individuals be indicted. Her sifting through the report and all of the evidence with the team that indicted the case, they only went with 19 of the defendants, had she gone with all 39, based on the Defense Counsels assertions, it would have given her the opportunity to find these financial gains. Why would she repeatedly asked the court to set a trial date as soon as possible if the motive was to continue to financially gain from the prosecution of this case. It doesnt line up. It does not make sense and it does not for a reason. It does not exist. More importantly, this office has multiple and largescale cases like this one and much larger. There are a lot of high profile prosecutions. If miss willis ultimate goal by hiring mr. Wade was for her financial benefit, she would put mr. Wade on every case. So she could revel in the riches and lavish lifestyle that has been referred to by Defense Counsel. There has been no evidence of. The evidence if she stayed at a doubletree in napa. I dont know that to be a lavish hotel. Most people, when they go to napa, they stay at the ritzcarlton, the four seasons, things of that nature, not a doubletree. The allegations that she was living the lifestyle of the Rich And Famous is a joke. An absolute joke. As it relates to what you heard and the secondary issue, the Forensic Misconduct, for lack of better words, it has to be shown the statements that were made by miss willis related to the prosecution of the case and the guilt or innocence of the defendants, we have none of those statements. There has been no evidence. Nothing has been provided as it relates to the specific statements made about any of the defendants and in relation to the guilt or innocence of any of the defendants. She said she had a 95 commission rate. That was what was done which she referenced she had a 95 Conviction Rate in the previous year. More importantly, it has been the allegations about race and religion being imputed in her speech and those comments were directed at the defendants at this table and if you listen to the speech, they are directed at two elected or political officials. I believe it was Marjorie Taylor greene and bridget, who is a member of the board of commissioners here. She used their names. I dont know my knowledge is they are not supposed to be sitting at the table and i have not seen them in my work as it relates to this case. Those allegations that she committed Forensic Misconduct are there is no validity, no evidence as it relates to any of those comments. This is an issue judge mcburney has previously ruled on when these allegations were alleged as it relates to statements made by miss willis and it involved a statement that the words fake electors were said by miss willis and he found there was no conduct that was impermissible as it relates to Forensic Misconduct. The drive home the point, at no point in any of the statements that you made, at no point did she mention the guilt or innocence. She was responding to comments made by Marjorie Taylor greene and two other political officials. What i find interesting is Defense Counsel wants to make these allegations that she had this tremendous misconduct by statement she made in her defense and has two unrelated to the officials, criticize the job she was doing. I find the Hypocrisy Interesting in the sense we have had videos released to the media, emails released to the media by Defense Counsel, statements have been made by the Defense Counsel in relation to this case. We have the unredacted version of the cell phone records released with his private and personal information, causing the threat of harm to miss willis and mr. Wade to increase. The most recent instance were the Text Messages. You had not ruled on their admissibility and it was made clear. It was the ability to get the full chain was something as something they were not able to do and they figured out a way in the minute they figured out a way, they release the information to the media and simultaneously turned it over to the state. For all of the reason stated before, this motion should be denied. The legal requirements that are required in order for the District Attorney to be disqualified have not been satisfied. The defendants have failed to raise any issue to satisfy the Legal Standard for disqualification as they political bias, which has been accusations made as well as demonstrated the prosecution was motivated by any means and anyway. They have not been able to prove this case was one of political prosecution. What i would leave the court with, how the state started this argument, courts have been unreceptive, if not hostile to disqualify prosecutors based on conflicts, which makes clear the burden of standard is high that must be met in order to be disqualified. That standard has not been met. A conflict has not been shown and more importantly, in conjunction with that, there has been no evidence the District Attorney has benefited financially at all but benefited with conjunction to any outcome whether it be now or as released to the prosecution will me. We request you deny the motion to disqualify miss bonnie wi willis. Miss fa fani willis. I am going to do specific rebuttal. The state makes an argument that we should have asked mr. Wade questions about his relationship and communications with mr mr. Bradley and the counsel objected over and over, claiming everything they were told by wade was attorneyclient privilege. Your honor made determinations to bradley. We did not get the opportunity to call him back to the stand. It is a false position to take, as disingenuous as it can be. We will be happy to call mr. Wade back to the stand but there could be no confrontation of mr. Wade when his counsel in the state are arguing it shouldnt be done. Second, lets use common sense here. Forensic misconduct received about 2 minutes worth of discussion. The rest is all on conflict. Misconduct dealing with the state is if you dont accuse someone or you dont say someone is guilty. Judge mcafee assuming you can impugn someones character to the degree it constitutes Forensic Misconduct, i guess the primary position was they were not talking about you at that church. If you listen to it and watch it, it starts off by saying why does commissioner Bridget Thorne and so many others and then it refers to they attack him for being black, not anyone else, just to attack the black man. They are not talking about miss the one or Marjorie Taylor greene. They are talking about us. Everybody knows that because not a single story from the media reported anything other than fani willis accused the defendants of being racist. If you follow the definitions of misconduct, or she can say they are racist. They are racist. That would not be a problem. That makes no sense whatsoever. The issue is not simply the church speech, it is why she did it. How she did it. Lets go to the relationship issues and the cell phone issues briefly. No one knew there was a relationship between wade and willis according to wade and willis. Not a soul was told they were dating or that there was an intimate relationship ever. They concealed it from all parties. From daddy. Daddy didnt even know they had a relationship. To suggest in the beginning of 2021, january, to whatever it was, into april, that they could not have met . They did not meet anywhere that would allow the public to see them. That is the reason they were meeting because nobody else was ever there. Who else was there besides mr. Wade and miss willis . Both of them agreed no one. No one ever went there except them. They didnt go to where daddy was. Daddy was there. No other prosecutors knew. No one knows except to . The one person that knew and bradley was the partner of wade. The only way that bradley can walk away i will skip that. Lets go to motives. Who has a motive that is the strongest . Fani willis. If they testify truthfully on every point, what happens if the relationship started before november 1st, they get disqualified. Who has the best motive of anyone to lie . They do. Who has the most at stake alive . They do. Judge mcafee thank you. Thank you, everybody. It has been made clear by the argument that there are several legal issues to sort through, several factual determinations i have to make and those are ones i can make at this moment. I will be taking the time to make sure i give this case full consideration it is due. I hope to have an answer for everyone within the next two weeks. Until that point, counsel can reach out and we will have it posted on the docket. Thank you. We are off the record. Judge mcafee indicating he is going to make a decision the next couple of weeks. We know what the Defense Attorney is arguing on behalf that this test the credibility of fani willis and nathan wade. This was the outside attorney she appointed in November 2021 to lead this Election Interference investigation and then we got caught up in her affair. You might have noticed every time the defense team or representative thereof come up to their case, fani willis would not leave. They are trying to Pay Attention to the fact she had a pattern of lying and misstating the facts, going so far to say prosecutors dont act like this, lawyers dont act like this, these people need to go. We are following it in atlanta. The fallout from this, the judge is saying a couple of weeks, maybe sooner, maybe not. That is a long time to be waiting on this. The end game is not clear. For the past seven weeks, this has been the case, a case within the case, where there prosecutors have been on trial. Not a lot of talk about Election Interference. Focus on the d. A. And the man she hired, nathan wade, a case that mixes politics and inflammatory statements. It is not clear where it is going to go. The judge will take up to two weeks to think about it but it could be an appeal. Fani willis did appear today and made fiery statements from the witness box, she is up for reelection. This case could be decided and then appealed and what is the final effect on fani willis . Has this helped her possible reelection chances . Even if she is removed, will it damaged her political future . Not clear right now. What they have to decide, how far you can go. Can he go so far as to say his whole case is blown up or she goes or doesnt go . He could pull her off, him off, both off, or he could pull neither off. Both sides are likely to appeal. They present an organized case today and divide the territory and really attack. They make the case these two lied under oath. If they use this case to profit, to make 1 million and spend it on themselves and lie about when their relationship started, that is the part they hammered home. The states presentation seems to be halting, sometimes stumped by the judges questions. The state presented a coherent case and the defense really back on their heels trying to recapitulate a lot of earlier testimony. You can see fani willis was itching to take the microphone but she did not do it today. You are topnotch, but you are also good at examining the local community and how things are going. How are people responding to this . Is it getting much traction, attention . Is there great pressure on the judge . It is getting a lot of attention. You can see the emotions in the courtroom. The older white attorneys for the defense saying these people dont belong here. These people made us a laughing stock and they not attorneys. Really a sense of scorn for what they considered two liars. On the other side, the defiance of fani willis. My daddy told me not to take money from a man. That defiance is going to be supported by many who vote for her while others might be embarrassed by the performance so far. We have the former assistant, if i can begin with you, we got a sense of where the defense is coming from here. We got a sense from the prosecutors in his time in their argument to go so far there is no evidence the defendants of this case they are presenting harm in any way, acknowledging you had to drag out to get there in the first place. What do you make of that . This did not move the needle or affect the case they are prosecuting . What does he have to apply here . You are talking about the facts . There is a case that lets you look at the appearance of conflicts. You dont actually have to have the conflict. He is going to make a decision about the cell phone records they are trying to enter into evidence, thousands of bits of information, whether that gets in or not gets in all this case. You have to get through the factual and legal issues before he makes a decision about whether it makes a disqualification here. It is one thing to say you have to go. This is just a plural above behavior, it makes everybody look bad. Or can you go further than that, this case is exploding. We start from scratch. What are his ground rules for himself. The issue is a motion to disqualify. It is not a motion to dismiss but the decision he makes could have collateral impact. If he is to find Forensic Misconduct such as perjury or lack of candor to the court, would that impact every other indictment the District Attorney signed in the accounting and that is an astronomical thought to have in terms of what Damage Control is around. It is very complex but for the purpose of what he is deciding in this motion in this order, it will be a determination of where they qualify in this order. Lets say she was dismissed. Bottom line, she is gone, nathan wade is gone, but the trial continues. Do they have grounds to say this started out as a circus and we are not sure it is going to resume any less . A big question would be, is it just fani willis and nathan wade who would be out of the case or is it the entire District Attorneys office. This has been an issue through these proceedings. There may have been a couple of different ways you could have handled this. The way the d. A. s office decided to handle it was to jump in with both feet as the advocate for speed to add nathan wade and it seems to me they have attached themselves at the hip to their principles and maybe that was the way the boss wanted it but it is hard for me to believe the way this was conducted that you could potentially disqualify one or both of wade and willis and not disqualify the office. The office will go if willis has to be disqualified. The other thing, i would think about, the practical effect of this. We look like we have a four to six week trial in connection with the case, the manhattan d. A. Case and in south florida, they have an argument over when they are going to schedule the Documents Case where they have a window because of the complications of the washington case. There is no trial date on the horizon. You are running out of days on the calendar. Another thing is the timeline on this relationship and more, parties who might or might not have been aware of that and now are. With the timeline, this is more involved than i thought. If you can respond to this series of timeline bites. How does the timing impact financial interests . They know if they find it started in 2019 that the appointment of wade was imp improper. He did not have approval from Fulton County to appoint him in the first place. That undermines the indictment. That is what they were worried about. It is how the money ended up going back to her. She put her boyfriend in the spot, paid him, reaped the benefits. It started earlier than assumed and the timeline sounds worse for the prosecution and we believed. What willis and wade said no, it did not start earlier and it only happened after he had been assessed and hired to do the specific work as a contractor. We have the old friend of fani willis and terrence bradley, who used to be a law partner of nathan wade, both saying they started earlier. When he was put on the stand, she said, did it start earlier and he said absolutely and he went on to offer details about when and where the timeline of the relationship but when he got on the stand, it was i dont recall, i was speculating, much less definitive information. He has to make an assessment based on what he has heard and what he believes is truthful about it. I get the sense of they had a relationship, it might have gone on earlier than we might have acknowledged or thought, but what difference does it make . The relationship never got in the way, nothing in the presentation deferred from that. What do you think of that . The issue with the relationship is not that there was a relationship. It started arising when there were lies being told about when it began and the judge has circumstantial evidence based on the testimony of both who are close with these individuals that the relationship was going on that it began earlier. That was never disclosed and had it been, it presented a Conflict Of Interest because of the financial gain from having the romantic partner in that role. N