News

Fani Willis fights to end Trump’s appeal over disqualification

Fulton County prosecutors asked a Georgia appellate court to dismiss Donald Trump‘s appeal of a state court ruling that allowed District Attorney Fani Willis (D) to continue prosecuting the criminal racketeering case against the former president and his allies. Assistant Fulton County District Attorney Donald Wakeford asked the Georgia Court of Appeals late on Wednesday to dismiss the […]

Fulton County prosecutors asked a Georgia appellate court to dismiss Donald Trump‘s appeal of a state court ruling that allowed District Attorney Fani Willis (D) to continue prosecuting the criminal racketeering case against the former president and his allies.

Assistant Fulton County District Attorney Donald Wakeford asked the Georgia Court of Appeals late on Wednesday to dismiss the appeal filed by Trump and eight other co-defendants, saying the trial court judge made “explicit factual findings” that defendants failed to provide adequate proof that Willis had a disqualifying conflict of interest.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis speaks after winning the Democratic primary on Tuesday, May 21, 2024, in Buckhead, Ga. (AP Photo/Brynn Anderson)

“As both this Court and the Supreme Court have repeatedly held, Georgia appellate courts will not disturb a trial court’s factual findings on disputed issues outside of certain, very rare, circumstances,” Wakeford wrote. “When a trial court makes determinations concerning matters of credibility or evidentiary weight, reviewing courts will not disturb those determinations unless they are flatly incorrect.”


Wakeford’s motion argues that Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee, who is tasked to adjudicate the sweeping racketeering case, granted “substantial leeway” in “gathering and submitting evidence” to support claims that Willis should be removed from the case, and that McAfee found they did not meet the burden for removal.

“The trial court’s careful and extensive evaluation of the resulting record, and its utter dismissal of the central evidence proffered by the Appellants, forecloses any possibility of reversal,” Wakeford wrote.

See also  Joe Rogan reveals podcast interview with Harris could happen before Election Day

The appellate court decided only days ago to stay lower court proceedings against Trump and the eight co-defendants who joined together to seek Willis’s removal over claims that she had an improper relationship with Nathan Wade, an outside attorney she hired to head up the case.

Oral arguments at the appeals court have been tentatively slated for early October, but the court postponed them due to a conflict, a court spokeswoman previously indicated.

Trump attorney Steve Sadow told the Washington Examiner that the filing from Fulton County prosecutors marks a “last ditch effort” to restart lower court proceedings in McAfee’s court and “stop any appellate review of DA Willis’ misconduct.”

“The State’s motion deliberately failed to mention that Judge McAfee’s ruling stated an ‘odor of mendacity remains’ from the hearing testimony by the DA and the State’s witnesses. The judge also said there were ‘reasonable questions’ as to whether Willis and former prosecutor Wade testified untruthfully. The State has tried this gambit before with no success,” Sadow said.

Wakeford contends that McAfee addressed those concerns when he gave Willis the ultimatum to either resign or have Wade step down. Wade resigned the day of the judge’s order, March 15.

The request by the prosecution also comes as consultants for Wade interrupted his sit-down interview with CNN Wednesday night after interviewer Kaitlyn Collins pressed Wade about the timeline of his relationship with Willis.

See also  C-SPAN goes no spin, just the facts for election night

After Collins asked Wade “when exactly” the relationship began, Wade started to reply before he stopped, adding “I’m getting signaled here.” He returned to the cameras 30 seconds later, and Collins asked him the question again. Wade responded that the questions about the relationship are “just a distraction.”

“It is not a relevant issue in this case,” he added, “and I think that we should be focusing on more of the facts and the indictment in the case.”

Willis’s office had not been expected to file any additional motions in the case until July, when they are scheduled to respond to the formal appellate briefs from Trump and the other defendants, which are due later this month.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Although three judges have been slated to weigh the appeal — Benjamin A. Land, Trenton Brown, and Todd Markle — it’s not immediately clear when the court would take up the motion to dismiss or ask the defendants to formally respond.

Read prosecutors’ 17-page motion to dismiss the appeal:

6.12.24 Motion to Dismiss as Improvidently Granted by Kaelan Deese on Scribd


Share this article:
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter