they did not confront mr. wade with it. that's where the state would begin with the comments that mr. merchant made about me referencing his life as lying. i never called -- i nevsed those words. i don't know why she made the material misrepresentation. it baby -- it could be because mr. bradley lied to her. i can submit to the court that those were material misrepresentations that were made to this court a few mondays ago, as everyone was arguing. i would bring to the court's attention that during that motion for certain subpoenas, mysterious attorney appears. he made very clear on that zoom, monsieur it he had no knowledge of a romantic relationship and absolutely no knowledge of cohabitation. those are the specific references that he made. so what i would submit to the court is, those are considedado. that his client has made based on the statements he made beuse of the representations she made to him. i know that sounds convoluted. what i would say to the court is, mr. partridge told the court that she had absolutely no

mr. wade. the point of that line of questioning was to embarrass and harass the district attorney in a way that was public and in a way that was to impugn her character as it relates to that line of questioning in front of the court, in front of anyone watching the proceedings as it unfolded. the language, i would submit to the court, an actual conflict must be shown, which is why the reference is again referenced. speculation and conjecture leads to order equals an appearance of impropriety, not necessary a conflict. >> in state versus sutherland, the 1989 case, while the prosecuting officers should see no unfair advantage is taken of the accused, those required to exercise in the case by the judge and the jury, the public prosecutor is a partisan in the case. if we were to proceed, there would be an end to the conviction of criminals, which goes to the premise that the appearance of impropriety is to apply to judges, not prose prosecutors. if that standard was to be applied in the manner in

mr. wade's qualifications and that it's almost as if ms ms mr. romans, counsel, is asking that the state put a prosecutor on the case, that she sees to be more qualified to attempt to convict her client. it's an interesting argument, and it's one that makes no sense furthermore, if you were to believe the claims and allegations as it relates to ms willis personal stake in the prosecution, the receiving of financial benefits in games. then you'd have to believe that she was also dating roy barnes, the former governor and gay banks. in addition to mr. wade, if she has this grand plan scheme in order to profit off of the prosecution of this case because that's what they're saying. or they're saying that she's she telepathically or prophetically. i was able to know that mr. barnes and mr. banks would turn down the position so she could then hire mr. way it's ridiculous. it's absurd. and it is desperate. it's in a desperate attempt to remove a prosecutor from a case with for absolutely no reason your honor. >> other than harassment and embarrassment >

and mr. wade's divorce case. sixth, the way the state has conducted the defense of this motion to disqualify especially the hearing. on the financial peace, the court asks for a limiting principle. and asked about materiality. the limiting principle is whatever impairs the independent professional judgment of the lawyer. that is applied routinely. we have a county code section that slightly prohibits gifts from contractors. period. we have by analogy of the federal bribery statute which has a threshold of $5,000. 18 usc 666. the court asked about burdens and inferences. the court can draw a negative inference from the state failure to produce evidence to support the invisible magic cash balancing theory based on state the thomas 311 georgia 407, particularly footnote 19. as to the time in question that the court asks about, there were two contracts for mr. wade executed after they acknowledged the relationship began. each one of them afflicted or completed under county and common law. the second c

willis and mr. wade never denied he'd been to that condo before. the specific testimony that was elicited by ms. willis and mr. wade that he had never laid his head, the direct quote, at that condo, which these records don't prove he laid his head anywhere. if you were to believe the analysis or if you were to -- if you really give credence to what the non-expert says as it relates to mr. wade's handset in september and november for the three to four hours that the phone is alleged to have remained, that doesn't disprove anything that was testified by both mr. wade and district attorney willis. it was that he visited there. the specific hours of their visits was not something that was pursued during questioning of both of the parties. so -- what i would also submit to the court is that if you look at the days as it relates to, in september and november, the use of, i guess, the type of information that is used to make the plots for the longitude and latitude of the handset is data records. it's not voice

mr. wade? and then she goes on. to say, god isn't it them playing the race card when they only question one. now, if she had been truthful with that congregation, truthful with the community, she would've said i had a relationship with him good, bad, forgive me. whatever that's what she should have said. but she chose to deflect and say the them the reference to them and the others and they saw obviously a reference to that motion filed by him by ms merchant's. they choose to go after the black man and she then goes on again deflecting away and deflecting to the what i call the third rail in american society, choosing somebody on the other side of being a racist so and so is a racist. they're racist she was the one playing the race card in a way to try to deflect from her own conduct she goes on to say in discussions with the lord, god, is that is it that some some will never see a black man is qualified, no matter his achievements. again, the deflection. what is, what is she saying? the liste

willis or mr. wade were in a romantic relationship, and that they were cohabitating, they knew that. i would submit to the court we didn't hear from any of those individuals. mr. bradley impeached no one, and i say no one. in order to properly impeach a witness, you have to confront the witness with specific statements. you can look at the you tube of the entire hearing, mr. wade wasn't once confronted with a statement that claimed that he said to mr. bradley the way you properly impeach somebody, you have to confront the witness, here would be mr. wade, and once he makes a statement you believe to be inconsistent, and you have a witness who can prove that inconsistency, that's when you call that witness, and when mr. wade was on the stand, not once was he asked, did you tell mr. bradley this in a confidential conversation in your conference room that was not covered under attorney/client privilege. that was not asked. the specifics of that conversation was not asked. any testimony that mr. bradley test

mr. wadeng challenged was not because he was black, it had to do with the relationship that have been alleged and later admitted to by ms. merchant. ms. willis took full opportunity to prejudice the defendants. then comes later and says it wasn't intended to be in the defense counsel. the intent was to get public sympathy for what ms. merchant had already alleged in her motion. that was a violation of the professional rules of conduct, a violation of 3.8 g. no question about it, it wasn't in response to anything that was said. it was a public statement, extrajudicial, for the purpose of making a comment upon the defendants. judge mcafee: it would be in response to a motion that was filed. mr. sadow: it was fault in response to a motion. if ms. willis wanted to respond to that point, she could have said the facts of the matter. instead she misstated what the situation was, took advantage of the opportunity, and ethical violation, and the ethical violation makes it clear you must refrain from ma

in hiding the mr. wadeorce case of 2023, talking about did you ever have sexual relations with a person during the marriage or separation? he is still married, he doesn't have a divorce decree, but his inter-is none. then he's asked he has been detained by a member of the opposite sex about place and time and all that, and the answer is none. why does he do that? he doesn't want to tell about the relationship he has with ms. willis and the benefits he has gotten and that he gave to her. what these answers are is absolutely reprehensible that a member of the state bar of georgia would file these answers that are in accurate. what does ms. willis do? ms. willis on her financial report, on whether or not she's gotten anything of $100 or more in value from a prohibited source, the court asked earlier about what the threshold might be. it is $100, that is it. she doesn't report any of all of the benefits she received from mr. wade. l the trips, all the entertainment, all the free nights in the luxury suite in ar

and so did mr. wade. they didn't have to testify falsely they could have testified truthfully, they could have indicated that the relationship the timing was in fact, before mr. wade was hired, they chose not to and in that sense, that dishonesty that constitutes a violation of their ethical responsibilities. this is not signing an indictment. this is not filing a pleading in which both sides have their own positions. this is a requirement that every witness has to tell the truth under oath. and if they don't tell the truth under oath, or there's a significant concern about their credibility. they violating their ethical rules. and it's anyone will tell you as your honor, already knew from when you were a prosecutor prosecutors are held to a higher standard they're the ones that are supposed to be seeking justice. they don't have a particular supposed to be disinterested when you have the lead prosecutor and the da giving what i suggest to you is untruthful testimony based on what ert has said, based on w

i suggest that the testimony that mr. wade gave and ms.lis gave and i'm specifically dealing now with the timing issue, without getting into anything else, that that brought forth a true concern about their truthfulness and being what is required of a lawyer in this state, which is candor for the tribunal, and that's 3.3 of the professional rules. specifically small a, one, make a false statement, a material fact or law to a tribunal. so that's, as i posit it to the court, that's the second ethical violation. and then you also have 8.4 of professional rules, it says it's a violation of the georgia rules of professional conduct for lawyer 2, and that's a 4, engge in a professional conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation. >> do you have to find that wade and willis lied, you have to find there is a concern, a legitimate concern based on the evidence in case about their truthfulness, a legitimate concern about the truthfulness, which equates to an appearance of impropriety because once you have the appearance of impro

i suggest that the testimony that was -- mr. wadean miss willis gave an specifically dealing now with the timing issue. without getting into anything else. that that brought forth a true concern about their truthfulness in being what is required of a lawyer in the state, which is candor of the tribunal. and that is 3.3 of professional specifically small a1 could make a false statement of material fact or law to the tribunal. to that, as i posit to the court, that is the second ethical violation. and that you also have 8.4 of the professional rules that says it is a violation of the georgia rules of professional conduct for lawyer two as a4 to engage in a professional conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, this vision is, representation, do you have to find that wade and willis right? no. what you need to be able to find is that there is a concern, a legitimate concern based on the evidence in this case about their truthfulness. a legitimate concern about the truthfulness. which equates to an appearance of impropriety. because once you

rebuttal specific rebuttal >> one >> state somehow makes an argument that we should have asked mr. wade questions about his relationship and his communications with mr. bradley when they objected over and over and over. and aides counsel objected over and over and over claiming that every thing that bradley was told by wade was attorney-client privilege your honor, made determinations thereafter to bradley. >> we >> didn't get the opportunity to call mr. wade back to the stand. so to claim that you can't impeach him because you didn't ask him when they objected to as ask him is a obviously is a false position to take as disingenuous as it can be now, if the court wants to open it up we'll be more than happy to call mr. wade back to the stand. but as the record stands, there could be no confrontation of mr. wade when both his counsel and the state are arguing that it shouldn't be done second let's let's use little common sense here forensic misconduct received about two minutes worth of discussion the rest of it is all long conflict forensic misconduct dealing with the way the statement

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 attorney-client 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 shouldn't be done. second, let's 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 don't accuse someone or you don't say someone is guilty. >> judge mcafee: assuming you can impugn someone's 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 say

willis and mr. wade. but it's mr. trump who remains on trial.cal points. at the end of the day, the only voters who matter are the 12 people who will be on the fulton county jury that considers this case. we will have some sense of where they are on d.a. willis with the election, which is coming up, which will almost certainly occur before the trial. >> lisa, paul, andrew, thanks to all of you. catch andrew and melissa murray for the trump indictments, breaking down these cases tonight at 10:00 eastern on msnbc, based on their best selling book. thanks to all of you. >>> deal or no deal? the details of hamas' latest offer for a cease-fire and how israel is responding. our report from israel next. this is msnbc. zyrtec allergy relief works fast and lasts a full 24 hours so dave can be the... deliverer of dance. ok, dave! let's be more than our allergies. zeize the day with zyrtec. type 2 diabetes? discover the ozempic® tri-zone. ♪ ♪ i got the power of 3. i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. in studies, the majority of people reached a

hours after that ruling, mr wade resigned. h her special counsel compromised the trial. thejudge disagreed, but said it did create an "appearance of impropriety." the judge also said ms willis — the fulton county district attorney — commited a tremendous lapse in judgment by engaging in an affair with mr wade. i spoke about all of these develpoments with tamar hallerman, a senior reporter from the atlanta journal—constitution. she covers the fulton county investigation into whether former president trump or his allies criminally interfered in georgia's 2020 elections. tamar, first of all, i want to get your thoughts on the judge's ruling today. judge mcafee basically split the baby with this ruling. on the one hand, he said that there was no actual conflict of interest that warranted removing da fani willis from the case — but he put the ball in her court and said, "either you can stay on this case, or nathan wade, your special prosecutor who's led this trump case, who you were in a romantic relationship with, or he stays." so

hours after that ruling, mr wade resigned. compromised the trial. thejudge disagreed, but said it did create an "appearance of impropriety." the judge also said ms willis — the fulton county district attorney — commited a tremendous lapse injudgment by engaging in an affair with mr wade. i spoke about all of these develpoments with tamar hallerman, a senior reporter from the atlanta journal—constitution. she covers the fulton county investigation into whether former president trump or his allies criminally interfered in georgia's 2020 elections. first of all, i want to get your thoughts on thejudge's first of all, i want to get your thoughts on the judge's ruling today. thoughts on the 'udge's ruling toda . g thoughts on the 'udge's ruling toda ., n �* thoughts on the 'udge's ruling toda. , thoughts on the 'udge's ruling toda. today. judge mcafee basically split the baby with _ today. judge mcafee basically split the baby with this _ today. judge mcafee basically split the baby with this ruling. - today. judge mcafee basically

i don't know how you can disqualify mr. wade and allow ms. willis to stay on. this is another example of a two-tiered justice system when it comes to president trump and those around him. >> and mcafee said that they fell short of an actual conflict of interest, but he had harsh words for willis and her behavior, that she demonstrated a tremendous lack of judgment and acted unprofessionally when she testified last month. he suggested he would be for a gag order to prevent willis from talking about the case. willis has been defiant and saying in response to the resignation letter, you have endured threats against you and your family and unjustified attacks in the media. and her problems are far from over, some legal experts say she may run into several challenges ahead from jury selection to delays. >> i think the decision not to remove her while legally wrong is really a coup for trump because it opens up the possibility of appeal of this, which is delay and that's what his main strategy here is is delay. >> willis is also facing other investigation including f

hours after that ruling, mr wade resigned. with her special counsel compromised the trial. thejudge disagreed, but said it did create an "appearance of impropriety." in another development stemming from mr trump's time in office, his former vice president says he will not be endorsing the presumptive republican nominee in the 2024 election. mike pence said it should come as no surprise he is not endorsing his former boss, whom he has publicly distanced himself from over mr trump's role in the 6january capitol riots. mr pence said during his own bid for he white house that his life was put in danger during the siege. he suspended that campaign in october. now that spring is finally here, millions of tourists will travel to japan to admire cherry clossoms in full bloom. but global warming has brought the date earlier and earlier, as sofia bettiza reports. cherry blossoms are a symbol of spring and the most famous cherry blossom spectacle in the world is undoubtedly injapan. now, normally, peak season is at the end beginning of a

the uncontroverted evidence shows that mr. wade lavishly spent on ms.illis the uncontroverted evidence shows that the money that he was spending on ms. willis came from this contract. there is a direct financial benefit that ms. willis received from. this i believe we have shown an actual conflict. >> that conflict is not just financial. it can be any conflict that impairs your independent, professional judgment. that's really embedded in the prosecutor's oath to act impartially. that he was the original sin from which all of the other problems flow. there's no boyfriend exception. think the message that would be sent if they were not disqualified. if this is tolerated, we will get more of it. this office is a global laughingstock because of their conduct. >> laura: that's an understatement. i love there's no boyfriend exception line. that could have been my favorite. all right, of course the state of georgia rejected the idea that fani willis' conduct with mr. wade or her church tirade amended to any ethical breach. they even dismissed the idea that 12

hours after that ruling, mr wade resigned. ut said it did create an "appearance of impropriety." speaking to bbc news earlier, tamar hallerman, a senior reporter from the atlanta journal—constitution, who described where this leaves the former president and his legal team. on the one hand this is not the outcome they wanted. they did not want willis staying in the position but on the same time they wounded her and a lot of damaging personal information has gotten out there into the public domain that the da �*s critics plan to use at every twist and turn in all of this. you have seen the former president use a lot of this information in his campaign rallies. he wasjust information in his campaign rallies. he was just in information in his campaign rallies. he wasjust in north georgia last weekend and as he was talking about the da, thousands in the crowd were laughing and billing so it is a rallying cry for him and we even saw today him sending out fundraising appeal is based on the ruling today. it is something that no matter

but both of them, ms willis and mr wade, denied there were any benefits, any sort of financial benefits on holidays together, they split the cost and so forth. but mr mcafee said that there wasn't enough evidence to suggest that there was an actual conflict of interest, that you you have to have evidence. it can'tjust be the appearance of it. however, he did say in order to resolve that appearance of impropriety, one of them has to step down. either fani willis has to recuse herself or nathan wade has to. and we understand that the judge will decide that. but in theory, the case should go ahead in august, which is when prosecutors want it to begin. well, it's interesting you end there, because if that decision is made, one or other does step aside. does that mean the the original timeline for this case remains in place? because what we've seen with these multiple cases that donald trump is facing, one of the principal tactics is simply delay. i'd be shocked if it goes ahead, the dates that the prosecutors. but if you look at all the other criminal cases, there are delays to them. even t

. >> as you know, mr. wade is a southern gentleman. me not so much. >> your honor -- >> no, no, no. this is the truth. i object to you getting records. you've been intrusive in to people's personal lives. you think i'm on trial. these people are on trial for trying to steal an election. i'm not on trial no matter how hard you put me on trial. >> martha: we may get another moment like that any minute when she responds. who knows what her action is. we'll find out when she's ready to share that with the country. so republican georgia state senate joins me now. he's leading a special georgia senate committee that is probing d.a. willis. thanks for being here. first of all, your reaction to what judge mcafee decided this morning and released in this document? >> well, we're not surprised at all. i actually expected he might have removed from the case. it's an extreme sort of action to totally dismiss the criminal prosecution. i didn't anticipate that. but he did give her the choice. he said you need to remove yourself and the entire da's office from further prosecution or at the least r

and in this case, in particular, she ms ms willis signed a contract she hired mr. wade as an independent contractor, a special prosecutor. there is a procedure in georgia law to do that, and it requires the approval of the county government where the mr. attorney sits that didn't happen here and it's very clear she hired this man who would not have been eligible to be hard by her da's office or under county policy either because of the nepotism clauses, you can hire your lover to be a contractor to pay him government taxpayer funds. >> i understand that okay but she's saying they weren't dating at that time and i understand that that's that's that's also now. but that but that's what that's what she's saying. so if they weren't dating, you have an issue. >> now, is that hasn't been proven? >> yeah. >> no, it hadn't but were there were some very compelling evidence today of people that reported that that then there's phone information that shows that as well, but that's not our job to determine whether she did that. they which would clearly disqualify her. i think that's

mr. wade's. so one of the things that i think was most striking to me about that church speech was when i heard it the first thing i said, why she lying, why is ms willis lying about how much these people made? john floyd was not paid the same rate as the other two prosecutors. they all had caps on their monthly the bills they were not the same. >> so >> the speech says, oh, this is about race. you're only calling out the one person. there was only one person that was having sex with fani willis. there was only one person that was billing these exorbitant rates. there was only one person that had never tried to rico case that's why that came out. >> well, i hear you on that. the judge of course, did not have any of his experience and qualifications be a part of this particular hearing? he did not deem it to be irrelevant, did not find that you met your burden of proof and eggers, thing. >> i don't >> recall anyone having the direct questions about sex with with body willis and nathan wade in the

it is deep, they are coordinating and there's no question that her texts with mr wade just the beginning jesse: she can't prosecute trump in the same courtroom that she perjured herself and. when you do get a new administration if donald trump does win in november, would you suggest he look into all of these prosecutions, sees their phones? these are government phones. if you have a subpoena, you should be able to see what they are writing and see what they are texting and e-mailing. that would really uncover some of the illegal and prosecutorial misconduct which we believe has happened. would you so just he do that? >> i suggest you absolutely dig deep and clean house. more importantly, i'm exhausted of seeing so many subpoenas come out, people come testifying in front of congress and then nothing happens. i want to see action. i want to see people accountable for real crimes. out this fake stuff that has to do with politics. are not saying you go after one side or the other. i'm saying clean house. there is no room for politics at all in the judicial system. i'm a lawyer, it shouldn't

i did not know if mr. wade paid for an uber, miss willis was in at the same time. speculate and did not include those. >> in brief? >> yes. >> harris: where they are right now, this is bipartisan special committee in georgia state senate looking into the love affair to see if there was conflict of interest and interesting anying on between nathan wade and fani willis and contact with white house and having meetings and this point, all money spent on lavish vacation and beach locale nathan wade was taking fani willis to. your response to what is going on? >> kennedy: i think ashleigh merchant is holding her own. a lot of people watching are going, wow, i wish i had a defense attorney like that. members of the trump orbit. she does represent one of former president trump's co-defendants in that case. she is doing a good job and holding up. the thing about this and really good point jonathan turley made, why haven't these two stepped aside? massive distraction and his point, so much is unfolding everyday. >> harris: so true. >> kennedy: damning facts, pinpointing him

and mrs. wade, which his wife did not appreciate i will, note they, are no longer in a relationship >> amy lee, what >> is your reaction? >> well, i heard that and i thought is this man 80 years, he eight. it sounded like a playground bully. >> we know from >> the da's own testimony that she's been called a whole lot worse during this case. and so hope this is one more thing. i think she's able to shake off. and i think it's really important given the judges concerns in the order about the possibility of a gag order on the state that would be really unusual. usually, the state seeks gag orders against defendants the less she says about this case in the future, the better she'll be. >> david before we go i want to ask you really quickly about a different case down south. the classified documents case in florida spent two weeks. we are still waiting for a firm trial date from judge aileen cannon. what is her assessment of what's going on there? >> a lot of folks believed that trump has home court adv

a bad light on the district attorney mr. wade, in this circumstance. and again, i don't know if the allegations are true or not but look at it as an observer like everybody else, i think if it's been a bad light, it's a self-inflicted wound that could have been bandaged up a long time ago. had she just removed mr. wade from the case whenever their relationship developed? >> and >> had she she might have been decided yet if something i think i'm going to just step back from this one case this is not fani willis versus donald trump. this is the state of georgia people, fulton county versus donald trump. so she could have said for the reasons of protecting the integrity of the mastication so that there's never any question because i feel so strongly about the evidence in this case. i'm going to step back from this. one. had let another prosecutor come in that could have been done. i understand the taken a hard line approach and not willing to back down, but i do think that some of what we're seeing is self-inflicted and really some unforced errors that th

just lucky had some harsh words for fani willis also has some pretty strong language related to mr. wade. here he calls wade's testimony his explanation for some incorrect formation that he submitted, quote, unpersuasive. he also describes his conduct as showing a willingness to wrongfully conceal his relationship with the district attorney. the judge said, as the case moves forward reasonable members of the public could easily be left to wonder whether the financial exchanges between wade and the district attorney have continued resulting in some form of benefit to the district district attorney or whether the romantic relationship has resumed. i think you read between the lines, you lied once you could potentially lie again or could reasonably think that the district attorney it's not exercising her independent professional judgment, totally free of any compromising influences. he says, and here's the key quote. as long as wade remains on this case, the unnecessary perception and will persist basically saying because of what has happened during this process, what they've learned, the f

seemed like a slam dunk to me, misleading under oath about when the affair started, when mr. wadee cash transactions in order to conceal what they had in fact been doing. and it appears the judge did what? he kind of cut the baby in half what did the judge doing your interpretation? >> a little bit of split the baby. if you are waiting for really aggressive language in the opinion, you don't get it. he could have basically said we have an elected official came into my courtroom and perjured herself. he instead refers to an odor of mendacity. kind of a softball approach split the baby approached ray what he basically said was i don't think the defense has proven an actual conflict of interest. but they have a proven there's an appearance of impropriety and because of that bad appearance it affects the process she's going to keep her office involved because no one else would pick up this thing and run. mark: is not clear to me at all what did the judge accomplish here? >> not a whole lot it's shuffling the deck a little bit in terms of which people are on the prosecution team. to be

he strongly indicates that he did not believe mr. wade. but then he ignores the fact that they testified largely in tandem. willis adopted his testimony. she supported his testimony. so if he was false, she was false. and it's very hard to separate these conjoined twins. it takes quite a surgeon. >> harris: i want to get to this. leo, i come to you with this because you are a civil rights attorney. maybe this is somebody who is known to you. this caught my eye last thursday as we were finding out that this case was wrapping down and, you know, there is a lot going on in fulton county right now about this case. people are saying -- i'll quote this man -- robert, a talk show radio host and civil rights attorney, a giant reality show. this was embarrassing for atlanta. it made our city look like a giant reality show. he confirmed to "newsweek" last week that now he plans to qualify to run against judge mcafee and that will happen in may. he noted that he voted for democrats and republicans in the past and going against mcafee because -- not b

the state of georgia rejected the idea that fani williwillisse is conduct with mr. wade or her church tirade amountedn di to any ethical breach. they even dismissesmd the idea that 12,000 i saw this 12,000.n who has that much to say of text calls between her and mr. red wade was in any way significandet in indicating the depth of their relationshipt . >> the judge said that he would try to have a decision about the disqualifylificati, ag within two weeks. >> joining me now is sol, former deputy independent counsel. >> fox news contributoand miker and mike davis, founder and president of the article three project and former law clerk justice gorsuch. w so let's start with this. get the load get. fannie saga is fairly falling. oh, the puns so bad tonight. >> i'm sorry. they're just it's friday. you know, this is what you you are you going to like? are you going to apologize obertsonn, the othertt members of the band? >> that's that's pretty good. that's a pretty that's a pretty good one. yeah. i think it's been a very bad ver week for the trump bashers to get trump crowd,

and there he was referencing the testimony of mr. wade and ms. willis.hat's, of course, is untruthfulness. you are not in a good position when your trial judge in the case just called you out for being dishonest with the courts. >> steve: never good. >> that shows his concerns. he tried to urge her to withdraw from the case totally and take the entire d.a.'s office out but gave her that sort of lifeline if she wouldn't we move herself to have mr. wade removed from the case and he did that. >> ainsley: senator i was reading this morning willis is subject of the ongoing investigation in the state senate we knew this and with house republicans. there is a new state commission with extensive powers over prosecutors like this who could also take action against her. what happens next when it comes to the senate, when it comes to the house republicans and this commission? >> the judge laid out that he was sort of handcuffed by the lack of very specific georgia law to ro remove her. he called on the general assembly to enact any laws necessary to put the proper

partial victory for the da and it does come at substantial professional and personal cost to her and mr. wade. >> reporter: willis gave fiery testimony last month, refuting allegations that she benefited financially from the relationship through romantic getaways. she and wade also forcefully denied lying about the start of their relationship, insisting it did not become romantic until after she hired him. >> you think i'm on trial? these people are on trial for trying to steal an election in 2020. i'm not on trial no matter how hard you try to put me on trial. >> reporter: former president trump's attorney saying in a statement "the court had not afforded appropriate significance to the prosecutorial misconduct of willis and wade, including the financial benefits. we will use all legal options available as we continue to fight to end this case." further challenges could push the trial over whether mr. trump and his allies tried to illegally overturn georgia's 2020 election results until after the 2024 election. this comes amid a new delay in the new york hush money case against former presid

it appears mr. wade was more of the strategist and the coach so to speak of the team. so i don't think that it would be that difficult for one of those other members of the team to step up and play that role as strategist, as the one who is kind of determining the theory of the case, how the case is going to proceed and those strategic decisions that have to be made as far as the plea recommendations and the responses to the motion. so i think because this is such a deep team, i believe that his removal of the case will not further delay it from the prosecution's standpoint in getting the case ready. i don't think that it will cause them any reason to not stick with the district attorney's initial statement that whenever the judge wants to try the case within 30 days, they will be able to start picking a jury. i don't think that that will change based on mr. wade's removal. >> this is your former office, so what is your sense of how all of this has affected the reputation of that office and fani willis personally? >> well, i believe that since these allegations were so

and the coconspirators mr. wade, essentially resigned, which i think was the right thing for him to do. and so fani will remain as the be on the case. she now has to find a top prosecutor to replace mr. wade it is no small matter when a when i judge removes a prosecutor from the case. but i think this judge has been doing a pretty remarkable job in the face of what anyone would assess to be a circus courtroom well before any trial is to take place and he's he's dealing with the issues as they come before them, before him and making rulings that he thinks are the best judgment to to keep the case moving forward. >> yeah. young judge, on the bench, just about a year. and then as a handle this question of whether her entire office should be disqualified because fani willis and nathan wade had a romantic relationship. the defendants were claiming that she financially benefitted. the judge said that they did not actually prove that allegation, but you've been involved in a high-profile file investigation related to forme

lead the trump case and argued she paid him back for any expenses in cash when i started dating mr. wade, april 2020 22 around the i don't know growing up, my daddy had three safes are now though my father bought me a lockbox and i always keep cash in the house you've on a date should have cash your pocket. >> judge. scott mcafee did have some tough questions for the attorneys pushing to remove willis and her team >> if someone buys their boss a stick of gum, is that per say, disqualify? >> it may not muted materiality requirement, but it's a personal benefits to the judge >> also asked if disqualification would really be the right remedy. or if any wrongdoing would just require reprimand from the legal bar. >> the proposition you're putting forward now is that if a representative, the state lead prosecutor, the district attorney, themselves says something that's untruthful on the record. that is something that immediately has to be proactively policed by the trial court. basically, what i'm getting at is where in the law that we find the remedy to an untruthful statement generally we se

had made and the fact that in fact, mr. wade had been paid that significant amount of money. and so we were in the courtroom watching those salacious details. come out. so i think he had to do that if it was the right move is decision was well-reasoned. we'll see what the court of appeals does >> michael moore, we've got to leave the conversation. they're great to see you, sir. >> great. so you need thank you. >> of course >> coming up the us today, filing a bombshell lawsuit against tech giant apple. y, the justice department says the company is abusing its power. and what this could mean for your iphone fashion moves fast >> setting trends is our business >> we need to scale with customer >> demand in real time so we partner with verizon, their solution for us, a private by gene network. >> we now get more control of production efficiencies and greater agility with a custom private five the network, our customers get what they want when they want it. >> now, or even smarter and ready for what's next. >> achieve enterprise intelligence. it's your vision, it's your verizon >>

ms willis and mr. wade never denied that he had been to that condo before the, specific testimony that was elicited by ms willis and mr. wade was that he never he had never laid his head. was the direct quote at at that condo, which these records don't prove that he laid his head anywhere? >> willis seem to be smiling as he was making that argument what did you think about it >> i thought there was a pretty awful place to be blunt. yeah. yeah. >> for a lawyer to be to be saying, hey, look he only said he didn't lay his head there but yes, they might be evidenced that he was there for several hours in the middle of the night from like 12, 30 as he left before the morning? >> yeah. so that is not where you want to be and some sense, even if something is technically true. and yeah, i'm sure it's technically true that he didn't lay his head there that is not where you want to be there could still be alive because you've misled everybody by saying i'm suggesting we're there overnight right. and that's what this

had made and the fact that in fact, mr. wade had been paid that significant amount of money. so we were in the courtroom watching those salacious details. >> come. out so i think he had to do that >> if it was the right move is decision was well-reasoned. we'll see what the court of appeals doesn't >> michael moore, we've got to leave the conversation. they're great to see you, sir. >> great. so you need thank you for coming up the us today, filing a bombshell lawsuit against tech giant apple y, the justice department says the company is abusing its power. and what this could mean for your iphone anderson cooper 360, >> tonight at eight on cnn >> wow, incredible, amazing my go-to is lumify eye drops. >> lumify dramatically reduces redness in one minute and look at the difference. my eyes brighter and whiter drug to eight hours lumo hi it's kind of amazing. >> see for yourself >> we know you care. >> but if this is all too real for you and your loved ones, make the call because we care to home instead >> to us. it's personal >> how long have you been tracking our cars value wi

mr wade handed in his resignation shortly after the ruling.pearance of impropriety, but that mr trump's lawyers had failed to prove a conflict of interest in the case. tamar hallerman is a senior reporter from the atlanta journal—constitution and she's been covering the investigation into whetherformer president trump or his allies criminally interfered in georgia's 2020 elections. here's her analysis of this latest ruling. on the one hand, this is not the outcome they wanted. they did not want fani willis to be staying in this position at the same time they really wounded her and a lot of damaging personal information has gotten out there into the public domain. that the da �*s critics planned to use at every twist and turn in all of this. you have seen the former president use a lot of this information in his campaign rallies. he was in his campaign rallies. he was in north georgia last weekend and as he was talking about the da and nathan wade, thousands and the crowd were lapping and pulling. a rallying cry for him and we even saw today co

willis' ultimate goal by hiring mr. wade was for her financial benefit, then she would put mr. wade on every single one of those cases and could certainly revel in the riches and lavish lifestyle that has been referred to by defense counsel. which there's been absolutely no evidence of. the evidence, she stayed at a double tree in napa. i don't know that to be a lavish hotel. most go napa and want to lavishly experience it they go to four seasons things of that nature. not a double tree. the assertion she was living lifestyle of the rich and the famous is a joke, absolute joke. as it relates to what you heard in the secondary issue is the forensic misconduct, and for lack of better words, what has to be shown is that the statements that were made by, here about ms. willis related to prosecution of the case and ultimately guilt or innocence of the defendants and we have none of those statements. there's been no evidence. nothing provided to -- been provided to your honor as relates to ms. willis' specific statements made about any of the defendants and in relation to the guilt or