Judge Scott McAfee ruled that Fani Willis could remain on the election subversion case against former President Donald Trump. However, he ordered her to lose special prosecutor Nathan Wade after an embarrassing two-month trial over their romantic relationship.
The judge strongly indicated that he didn't fully believe Willis and Wade when they claimed their relationship started only after she hired him as a special assistant district attorney.
On March 15, 2024, Judge Scott McAfee ruled that Fani Willis could remain on the election subversion case against former President Donald Trump. However, he ordered her to lose special prosecutor Nathan Wade after an embarrassing two-month trial over their romantic relationship. The judge strongly indicated that he didn't fully believe Willis and Wade when they claimed their relationship started only after she hired him as a special assistant district attorney.
, Manny Arora told his colleagues. And he’d heard that Wade was in a romantic relationship with Fani T. Willis (D), potential grounds for Willis’s disqualification from the case.
Accuracy
Fani Willis can stay on Georgia Trump case if she fires special prosecutor Nathan Wade
Defense lawyers accused Willis of essentially filing and then prolonging the investigation to benefit financially from her relationship with Wade
Willis denied accusations that she filed the case to cover up her misdeeds and milked the 'gravy train' of the Trump election fraud case
Defense lawyers argued Willis improperly benefited from Wade, even if she did repay him all the money he spent on their vacations
An outsider could reasonably think that the District Attorney is not exercising her independent professional judgment totally free of any compromising influences as long as Wade remains on the case
Willis testified she ended her relationship last year
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The first is an appeal to authority when it mentions that Wade was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars as the lead prosecutor on the case. This implies that he must be qualified for his job, but there is no evidence provided to support this claim.
The reaction was muted. Some of the lawyers didn't even participate in the call.
Bias
(85%)
The author of the article is biased towards Trump and his co-defendants in the Georgia election interference case. The author uses language that dehumanizes Fani Willis by calling her a 'sleuth defense attorney' and accusing her of misconduct without providing any evidence to support these claims.
The author calls Fani Willis a 'sleuth defense attorney'
The author implies that Wade was in a romantic relationship with Fani T. Willis (D), potential grounds for Willis' disqualification from the case.
Willis and Wade were having an affair before he was hired as a special assistant district attorney
Defense lawyers accused Willis of essentially filing and then prolonging the investigation to benefit financially from her relationship with Wade
McAfee strongly indicated that he didn't fully believe Willis and Wade when they claimed their relationship started only after she hired him as special assistant district attorney
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Willis's romantic relationship with Wade began months after he was hired as special assistant district attorney. However, this contradicts testimony from both Willis and Wade who claimed their relationship started before he was hired. Secondly, the author implies that Willis filed and prolonged the investigation to benefit financially from her relationship with Wade. This is not supported by any evidence presented in court or otherwise.
The article claims that Fani Willis's romantic relationship with Nathan Wade began months after he was hired as special assistant district attorney, but this contradicts testimony from both Willis and Wade who claimed their relationship started before he was hired. This is a lie by omission.
The author implies that Fani Willis filed and prolonged the investigation to benefit financially from her relationship with Nathan Wade, but this is not supported by any evidence presented in court or otherwise.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses the phrase 'tremendous lapse in judgment' to describe Willis' actions, which is an example of a hasty generalization. Additionally, the author describes Wade as having been hired by Willis for his background and accomplishments rather than because he was her lover or mentor at that time, which is an example of false dilemma. The article also contains examples of ad hominem attacks against both Willis and Wade, such as calling them liars and cheats.
The author uses the phrase 'tremendous lapse in judgment' to describe Willis' actions, which is an example of a hasty generalization.
Additionally, the author describes Wade as having been hired by Willis for his background and accomplishments rather than because he was her lover or mentor at that time, which is an example of false dilemma.
The article also contains examples of ad hominem attacks against both Willis and Wade, such as calling them liars and cheats.
Bias
(85%)
The article contains examples of bias in the form of a personal attack on Fani Willis. The author uses language that dehumanizes and demonizes her by calling her relationship with Nathan Wade an affair and implying that she is unprofessional for lashing out at defense lawyers during testimony.
The article calls Fani Willis's relationship with Nathan Wade an affair, which implies a negative connotation.
The author uses the word 'unprofessional' to describe Fani Willis's behavior during testimony, implying that she is not qualified or capable of performing her duties as District Attorney.
Greene complained that Judge Scott McAfee should have recused himself in the Fani Willis case because he once worked for the Fulton County district attorney and donated to her campaign.
McAfee ruled that there was a significant appearance of impropriety in the prosecution team, resulting in Nathan Wade tendering his resignation hours later.
Accuracy
Greene's arguments were dismissed by legal experts who noted that she did not cite a sufficient basis for judicial recusal and that McAfee's ruling was highly critical of Willis unprofessional behavior.
Willis is allowed to remain on the Trump criminal case despite McAfee's ruling and decision not sitting well within MAGA circles.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Greene's recusal demand was shredded by legal experts when it fact they did not dismiss her arguments entirely. They simply noted that she did not cite a sufficient basis for judicial recusal and pointed out McAfee's ruling was highly critical of Willis unprofessional behavior. Secondly, the author implies that Greene is particularly outraged by the decision when in fact there is no evidence to suggest this. Lastly, the article contains several instances of sensationalism and selective reporting.
Lawyers and legal experts, however, took umbrage with Greene’s assertion that McAfee had a conflict of interest in the case and should have recused himself.
Greene posted on social media shortly after McAfee released his ruling. “Judge McAfee should have recused himself in the first place because of his obvious bias. Fani Willis lied under oath in his courtroom!”
The apoplectic Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) complained on Friday that Judge Scott McAfee should have recused himself in the Fani Willis case because he once worked for the Fulton County district attorney and donated to her campaign.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author makes an appeal to authority by stating that Greene's arguments were dismissed by legal experts without providing any evidence of their expertise or qualifications. This is a form of hasty generalization and should not be taken as factual information.
>Greene complained on Friday that Judge Scott McAfee should have recused himself in the Fani Willis case because he once worked for the Fulton County district attorney and donated to her campaign. The MAGA congresswoman's arguments were summarily dismissed by legal experts, however, who noted that Greene did not cite a sufficient basis for judicial recusal.
Greene was particularly outraged. She posted on social media shortly after McAfee released his ruling:
Bias
(85%)
The author of the article is biased towards Marjorie Taylor Greene and her views. The author repeatedly uses language that depicts Greene as an extremist and a liar without providing any evidence to support these claims.
An apoplectic Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) complained on Friday
Following Willis’ combative testimony in which she defended her romantic relationship with the special prosecutor she assigned to the election interference case against Donald Trump
Greene's arguments were summarily dismissed by legal experts, however
Willis survived the disqualification challenge but her reputation and credibility were damaged by allegations of an improper relationship with Nathan Wade.
The defendants alleged that Wade began his relationship with Willis before he was hired and paid him for trips they took together.
McAfee determined there wasn't conclusive proof of the allegations against them but found reasonable questions about their timing remained which undermined the perception of impropriety in the case.
Willis kept no records of payments she made to Wade and her claim that she paid him back in cash was not so incredible as to be inherently unbelievable.
If Wade remained on the case, the perception of compromising influences would continue which could undermine public trust in the legal system itself.
Wade was chided for not disclosing his relationship with Willis in his divorce proceedings which creates a public perception that he could continue hiding it even though they said their relationship ended last year.
In her resignation letter to Wade, Willis praised him and thanked him for the opportunity to be part of the team.
Willis thanked Wade for his contributions and complimented him on his professionalism and dignity despite facing threats against him and attacks in court on his reputation as a lawyer.
McAfee wrote that Willis's comments at an Atlanta-area church in January about the case were legally improper but not enough to establish a permanent taint of the jury pool.
The judge also warned of potential gag orders against Willis which could prevent her from making public comment on the case.
Devan Cole, Jason Morris and Nick Valencia contributed to this report.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
The article discusses the ruling that allows Fani Willis to remain on the Trump election subversion case. The judge ruled that either Wade or Willis would have to leave the case due to a conflict of interest over their romantic relationship. While Willis survived the disqualification challenge, her reputation has been tarnished by this incident and it may affect public perception of her credibility as a prosecutor.
The judge described Willis' fiery testimony as 'unprofessional'
Bias
(85%)
The article discusses the ruling that allows Fani Willis to remain on the Trump election subversion case. The judge ruled that either Wade or Willis would have to leave the case due to an 'odor of mendacity' over their relationship. While this is a technical legal win for Willis, it leaves a stain on her case both in court and with potential jurors who are likely familiar with the episode. The judge was highly critical of Willis and Wade's relationship, describing it as being the result of 'bad choices'. However, Georgia law does not permit finding an actual conflict for simply making bad choices. Both Willis and Wade took the stand in court and Willis' appearance came in an extraordinary moment when she went to testify. The judge described her testimony as unprofessional but did not condone this lapse in judgment or the manner of her testimony during the evidentiary hearing. Delay is not the only opportunity for Trump's defense team, they have also found ways to shift focus from Trump's dozens of criminal charges to undermining prosecutors and sowing distrust in legal system itself.
]The judge ruled that either Wade or Willis would have to leave the case due to an 'odor of mendacity' over their relationship.[
