The Georgia election case involving former President Donald Trump and his associates, who challenged the 2020 election results in the state, is likely to extend beyond Election Day. This ongoing legal battle has drawn significant attention, particularly after allegations surfaced regarding Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s romantic relationship with her special counsel, which has become a focal point in the case.
On Sunday, an attorney connected to the case, who first exposed Willis’s relationship with her special counsel, Wade, pointed fingers at Willis for the prolonged duration of the case. Speaking on “The Georgia Vote” on 11 Alive, the attorney emphasized that neither she nor her client, former Trump White House opposition researcher Michael Roman, are responsible for the delays. Instead, she asserted, “Willis and her actions” are the primary cause. “I think what caused the voters to not know what happened in this case is Ms. Willis and her actions,” she said. “She is the one to blame, not me bringing to light those actions. They had a choice, they could have done it differently, and they chose to go this path.”
The controversy began when it was revealed that Willis and Wade started a romantic relationship after he was appointed to work on the Trump case. Defendants in the case have alleged that their relationship started as early as 2019, raising concerns about Willis’s motives in appointing Wade, who was reportedly paid more than $650,000 for his work. The attorney further uncovered credit card records showing Wade financed luxury vacations with Willis using his company card, a point that has added fuel to the allegations.
While Judge Scott McAfee initially ruled that this relationship was not sufficient grounds to disqualify Willis, the case is now before the Georgia Court of Appeals. The court will decide whether McAfee’s decision was correct. The appeals process is expected to be lengthy, with the first hearing scheduled for December 5, long after the 2024 election.
The attorney also criticized the handling of the case, suggesting it could have progressed more efficiently if Willis had pursued a narrower indictment, akin to the approach often seen in federal cases. “If the defendants had been charged individually, or it had been a more narrow indictment like we see in the federal system, it would have moved through a lot easier,” she explained.
Willis’s office has defended its actions, calling McAfee’s decision a “boon” to the defense and urging the appeals court to dismiss the disqualification matter. With the case set to drag on, the debate over Willis’s role and her relationship with Wade is likely to continue, impacting the broader legal landscape surrounding the 2020 election challenges.