Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University and a legal analyst for FOX News, said Sunday that he made an “astonishing” discovery in the case of Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and fellow attorney Nathan Wade. It detailed the facts and suggested the next steps the judge should take.
Turley appeared on “Fox News Sunday” to discuss Willis and Wade's recent testimony during the evidentiary hearing. The two face allegations that the Treasury Department benefited financially from their romantic relationships with Wade while they worked together on the election fraud case against former President Donald Trump.
Fox host Shannon Bream asked Turley about her thoughts on the two men's contradictory statements and whether she thought the judge used “sufficient judgment” to disqualify her from the case. . (Related article: Dramatic hearing on Fani Willis corruption allegations concluded, outcome still unclear)
Mr. Turley detailed that he believed the judge had “heard enough” based on the statements he had been given, but that he believed the judge had “heard enough” based on the statements he had been given, but that the judge had given him two due to the “difficult position” in which he found himself. He said people could be asked to “leave their seats.” The judge noted that he could refer Willis and Wade's “allegations of false statements” to court, which could be an option in addition to a motion to remove the judge.
“Well, one thing is clear: no one will ever say election law is boring again,” Turley said. “But what's surprising about this case is that there are two prosecutors who are accused of making false statements in court. Mr. Wade is accused of giving false answers to interrogation, and Mr. Willis is accused of giving false statements in court. He's accused of making false statements on his own tax return. That's why they're prosecuting the defendant in this case.”
“Given what Tom said, they have to realize that at some point their personal interests will supersede the interests of the case and the firm, and they haven't done that yet. Has the judge heard enough? Yes, but he is still in a tough position. Disqualification is a big deal. The issue of seeming impropriety requires him to 'step aside.' It may give you reason to say so.”
“My question is, would he introduce these two to the bar? They claim that false statements were submitted, but their testimony was useless in that regard. So, This judge will say, “Look, I'm going to suggest that one or both of you withdraw,'' or maybe he'll order, “I'm also going to ask my lawyers to investigate these allegations.'' Would you say, “I'm going to ask you to do that?” ? '' Turley said.
Reports about Willis' relationship with Wade surfaced in early January after a court filing was filed on behalf of former Trump campaign official Michael Roman, who is named in Willis' indictment. Since the filing was made public, Mr. Willis has acknowledged his relationship with Mr. Wade, whom he appointed as special counsel in the case against Mr. Trump. Roman's complaint alleges that Willis agreed to funds to pay for their vacation, but she denies receiving any financial benefit from the relationship.
