Well, well, well… isn’t this interesting. In a court filing yesterday [SEE pdf HERE], one of the co-defendants in the Fulton County election case against President Trump is presenting very specific details of an intimate relationship between District Attorney Fani Willis and the Special Prosecutor she hired, Nathan Wade.
At first review, if the allegations are true, DA Willis had a financial motivation to initiate the case against Trump, as her boyfriend was the primary financial beneficiary. The filing documents how Fani Willis and Nathan Wade took several extravagant vacations and indulged in an exclusive lifestyle as the result of payments Willis’s office made to Wade.
If investigated as accurate, this could be very legally problematic for the Fulton County District Attorney and her case against President Trump. The conflict of interest is very bright under this spotlight. [Also, lolol 
]
ATLANTA – District Attorney Fani Willis improperly hired an alleged romantic partner to prosecute Donald Trump and financially benefited from their relationship, according to a court motion filed Monday which argued the criminal charges in the case were unconstitutional.
The bombshell public filing alleged that special prosecutor Nathan Wade, a private attorney, paid for lavish vacations he took with Willis using the Fulton County funds his law firm received. County records show that Wade, who has played a prominent role in the election interference case, has been paid nearly $654,000 in legal fees since January 2022. The DA authorizes his compensation.
The motion, filed on behalf of defendant Michael Roman, a former Trump campaign official, seeks to have the charges against Roman dismissed and for Willis, Wade and the entire DA’s office to be disqualified from further prosecution of the case.
Pallavi Bailey, a Willis spokeswoman, said the DA’s office will respond to Roman’s allegations “through appropriate court filings.” Wade did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
It is unclear if the explosive issues raised in the filing undermine the validity of the indictment against Trump and the remaining 14 co-defendants or simply muddy the waters by questioning Willis’ professional ethics.
One ethics expert said that the the allegations, if true, raised serious questions.
Stephen Gillers, a professor emeritus at New York University Law School who has written extensively about legal and judicial ethics, said a closer look at Willis’ decision-making is be needed before it can be determined whether the indictment should be dismissed.
If the allegations are true, Gillers said, “Willis was conflicted in the investigation and prosecution of this case” and wasn’t able to bring the sort of “independent professional judgment” her position requires.” (read more)
[Source pdf]
