Lawyers for Trump and co-defendants slam ruling allowing Fani Willis to stay on case: ‘defies logic’
Lawyers for Donald Trump and for his co-defendants in the Georgia election interference case slammed the judge’s decision not to fire Fani Willis on Friday.
Judge Scott McAfee issued a ruling which was highly critical of the embattled DA for having an affair with her lead prosecutor, but said there wasn’t enough evidence to disqualify her.
Ted Goodman, a political advisor for co-accused Rudy Giuliani, blasted the decision, saying: “We are showing the world that the United States no longer has a fair system of justice.”
Lawyer Ashleigh Merchant spearheaded the effort for Willis’ disqualification and claimed the judgment should have been much stronger, saying: “While we believe the court should have disqualified Willis’ office entirely, this opinion is a vindication that everything put forth by the defense was true, accurate and relevant.”
Merchant, who represents co-defendant Michael Roman, first uncovered her affair with prosecutor Nathan Wade in January, setting the current proceedings into motion.
“The judge clearly agreed with the defense that the actions of Willis are a result of her poor judgment and that there is a risk to the future of this case if she doesn’t quickly work to cure her conflict.”
In January Merchant had accused Willis of hiring her alleged boyfriend to the lucrative position of lead prosecutor and then benefitted financially from it when Wade paid for her to have fancy getaways.
She also charged the pair had been in a romantic relationship since 2019, almost two years before Wade was appointed lead prosecutor. Both denied that on the stand and said they weren’t romantic until 2022.
McAfee wrote that there are “reasonable questions” about whether Willis and Wade “testified untruthfully about the timing of their relationship,” in his ruling.
“It defies logic for Fani Willis or Nathan Wade to remain on this case, considering the clear evidence of prosecutorial misconduct, including evidence of financial gain and providing untruthful testimony,” Goodman added.
Trump lawyer Steve Sadow said the judge didn’t “afford appropriate significance to the prosecutorial misconduct of Willis and Wade, including the financial benefits, testifying untruthfully about when their personal relationship began.”
Sadow hinted that he may seek to appeal the decision, when he said: “We will use all legal options available as we continue to fight to end this case, which should never have been brought in the first place.”
Christopher Anulewicz, a lawyer for co-defendant Robert Cheeley, agreed.
He said in his own statement: “We believe the finding of impropriety requires the disqualification of the entire prosecution team and are assessing next steps.”
Wade and Willis — who since split in the summer of 2023 — also claimed that they roughly split the cost of vacations they went on together with Wade paying up front on credit cards and Willis paying her portion back to him in cash.
McAfee noted that the “lack of any documentary corroboration” of how they split costs when together was “understandably concerning.”
William Cromwell — who represents co-defendant Cathleen Latham — told The Post the decision should have gone further especially considering “there is a potential perjured affidavit by Mr. Wade,” where information he submitted to the court was untrue.
“That’s an issue,” Cromwell said.
