Over the last week, one of the biggest topics of discussion is whether Fulton County DA Fani Willis will be disqualified from the case.
After testimony was given that contradicted Willis’ timeline of her affair, many suspected she would be disqualified for having allegedly lied to the court, but CBS legal analyst Rikki Klieman does not believe that will be the case.
Talking Points…
- Testimony contradicts timeline
- Klieman says not enough to disqualify
- Analysis
When Fulton County DA Fani Willis originally confirmed her affair with prosecutor Nathan Wade, she made it appear as though it had not yet started until after the Trump investigation had begun. Recent witness testimony, however, alleges that is not the case.
Robin Yeartie was called to testify in the disqualification hearing, and her testimony, if true, shows that the affair between Willis and Wade started long before the November 21 timeline that Willis laid out in her testimony. Yeartie testified that she witnessed Wade and Willis “kissing” and “hugging” as far back as 2019.
Two aspects of this need to be analyzed. The first is the actual affair and whether that impacted decisions regarding the Trump indictment. And the second is the alleged lie told by Willis to the court.
CBS legal analyst Rikki Klieman believes Willis’ conduct will hurt her credibility during a trial, but it is unlikely to disqualify her from the case. Klieman stated:
“Well, it was a salacious couple of days on television watching a camera in the courtroom to hear about the personal, intimate relationship of District Attorney Fani Willis and the prosecutor she hired who was her lover for a period of time.
“The salaciousness of this and the fact that she decided to testify when she was angry leads us to a point that it has probably hurt her credibility. The case will not be dismissed. I doubt she will be disqualified. But ultimately although she wins the motion I would say that it could be said politically that the case then legally really becomes a loser.”
Donald Trump reacted to the testimony, posting on Truth Social:
“FANI NEVER PAID CASH. SHE GOT FREE TRIPS AND OTHER THINGS FROM HER LOVER, WITH THE EXORBITANT AMOUNTS OF MONEY SHE AUTHORIZED TO BE PAID TO HIM. A GIANT SCAM. WITCH HUNT!!!”
I agree that Willis being too testy on the stand was not a good look, but if she really lied regarding the timeline, there is no doubt in my mind a decent defense attorney would be able to make a case to the jury that the investigation was tainted, especially when you consider how much more Willis was paying Wade over that of an experienced RICO prosecutor.
An argument could easily be made that Willis placed Wade into the investigation to prove her conclusion, not to investigate what happened.
When it comes to judges these days, it has become very difficult to predict their thought process, especially when it comes to anything related to Donald Trump. If I were the judge, at the very least, I would say that Willis must be removed from the case, as should Wade. This, however, all hinges on whether or not people believe the testimony of Yeartie, a former friend of Willis’. Does she have a motive to lie about Willis and Wade? Once we have the answer to that question, I believe everything else falls in place.
