If Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis were to indict citizen Fani Willis and her ex-boyfriend Nathan Wade on charges of perjury, conspiracy, and obstruction of justice, she would have a very strong case. Dew. The evidence of perjury is overwhelming. Many have been convicted on far less evidence.

Recall that Willis testified under oath about the material fact that he did not hire Wade as special prosecutor while Willis and Wade were romantically involved. Both men testified that their romantic relationship began after they were hired. If it is an intentional lie, it meets all the elements of perjury.

Let's look at the evidence. First, there was testimony from two witnesses, both of whom provided evidence that the relationship began before Wade was appointed special prosecutor. As Willis herself reminded us when challenged about her lack of proof that she repaid Wade in cash, the testimony of one witness was evidence, i.e., her own self-serving I mean testimony, but certainly the testimony of two witnesses is even better evidence. Additionally, there is writing from another witness that confirms that the relationship began earlier than the testimony. (Related: Alan Dershowitz: Is President Trump's huge fine unconstitutional?)

All of this eye-and-ear testimony is supported by incontrovertible scientific evidence through cell phone records that show Wade was near Willis' apartment in the middle of the night. A cell phone ring indicated that Wade had traveled from his home toward Willis' home late in the evening and was calling Willis. The ping then stops for a few hours and starts again early in the morning. This cell phone document and other cell phone documents provide strong circumstantial evidence that Wade was at Willis' apartment before he was hired, at a time of night when sex is more likely than Scrabble. It consists of

My client is currently in prison on a murder charge with far less convincing circumstantial evidence. Willis undoubtedly succeeded in indicting many defendants on the basis of much less convincing evidence.

Additionally, there is testimony that Wade paid for numerous vacations with credit cards, but Willis paid him back every penny in cash. No sane jury would believe such testimony about the alleged cash payments from her lawyer, who was legally obligated to report the gifts given to her. She knew she might have to prove these cash payments someday to prove she wasn't breaking the rules. But she maintained that she did not keep any records of these cash payments. She left no bank withdrawals, no deposits, no pictures of her payments, not even entries in her diary. Her only evidence is that she once paid cash at a wine tasting event in California.

Overall, the far more likely scenario is that Willis and Wade began a sexual relationship well before he hired him, that Willis received several thousand dollars in vacation pay from Wade but did not pay it back; And it turns out that the two were in cahoots. To come up with an outrageous story that would allow them to continue prosecuting former President Donald Trump. Her basic defense seems straight out of a Marx Brothers movie. “Who do you believe? Me or your own eyes?”

Based on this case and other incriminating evidence, the real question is not whether these two men should continue to be prosecuted in the case against Mr. The question is whether he should be convicted of a crime.

Who will protect the guardian? More specifically, who will indict the prosecutor? The facts of this case warrant a criminal investigation. This is especially true since so many Americans have been able to see and hear compelling evidence on television and other media. I doubt that very many viewers believed Willis and Wade's self-serving testimony.

The presiding judge in this case has no authority to initiate a criminal investigation or prosecution. But so do other law enforcement agencies. If it fails, it will undermine the rule of law, the integrity of America's judicial system, and undermine the faith that many Americans already have in equal justice.

Alan Dershowitz is a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School and the author of Get Trump, Guilt by Accusation, and The Price of Principle.This work reissue From the Alan Dershowitz Newsletter.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

All content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent, nonpartisan news distribution service, is available free of charge to legitimate news publishers with large audiences. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and DCNF affiliation. If you have any questions about our guidelines or our partnership, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.