I have to thank Fani Willis. If it weren’t for her, I don’t know what I would have written about this morning.

I spent too much time yesterday watching the hearing where she and Nathan Wade testified in connection with the Trump Georgia election fraud case. You probably know this, but Willis is the Fulton County GA District Attorney, and Wade is an attorney she contracted with to be the lead attorney on the case involving Trump and the thousands of other defendants. Wade and Willis had known each other for some time – but during the preparation of the case they became something more than friends; they became lovers and travel companions. But they didn’t tell anyone. And then they were no longer lovers, but still friends, and still working together in charge of the case. And someone found out.

One of the defendants accused them of improper conduct and asked them to withdraw from the case, which they refused to do. He then filed a motion to require them to leave the case, and this motion was set for a hearing, which took place yesterday and should finish today. Under Georgia rules, cases are televised, and MSNBC decided to give its day time staff a day off, and show the proceedings rather than its usual day time line of repetitive news shows.

So…..now I know more about these two attorneys than I did when I woke up yesterday morning, and found them to be relatively boring people, especially Wade, although he seems like a nice man. He has had it rough – his wife had an affair in 2015, leading to a decision to get a divorce, but to act as a family and remain in the same house until their youngest daughter was out of high school. But, beginning in 2015, when intimate relationships between husband and wife stopped, they each felt free to date others, and did.

In 2019, however, Wade was stricken with cancer and stopped dating, largely because this was the same time that the COVID pandemic was at its highest, and he simply isolated himself most of the time. Wade had a law practice with two partners and also did some teaching, meeting Willis when she came to one of his classes. They became friends, but not dating friends, and she turned to him when she needed extra help for the election fraud case. It was while working with each other that their relationship developed beyond friendship.

Although their conduct was probably colossally bad judgement, especially considering the nature of this case, it is not clear what law or ethical rule it violated. There doesn’t seem to be anything in the relationship that prejudiced Trump and his co-defendants. But those who brought this motion seem to want to show impropriety in that Willis hired Wade (her lover) and in return he took her on two cruises, on California trips, and on trips to Belize and Aruba. Willis and Wade both testified that their dating and sexual relationship began after the contract with Wade was signed, but there is one witness (a woman worked in the Fulton County D.A. office, but was fired – or perhaps she resigned so she wouldn’t be fired, and can be classified as a disgruntled employee) who testified that their relationship started before Wade was hired. Wade and Willis also each testified that they basically split the cost of their travels 50-50 (without calculating each penny each time), although they had no records to show that. Often, Wade fronted money for flights, hotels and cruises, and Willis paid him her share, but did so in cash, so that there were no records of reimbursements.

Wade and Willis testified very differently. Wade was controlled, polite and pretty much what you would call a good witness. He made sure he understood each question, he gave short answers, and he was consistent in what he said. Willis, as I understand it, had not wanted to testify and had filed something to challenge whether she needed to act as a witness. But once she was called, she announced she was changing her position and wanted to testify.

She was a very different type of witness. She was angry and sounded a bit like the defendant in the main case, Donald Trump, as she accused the attorney for the defendant who first filed the motion of lying over and over again. She also wanted to tell her story. So, she did not limit her answers to short ones precisely directed to the question she was asked, but answered each question in great detail, going much beyond what was necessary.

Everything she did, I thought, was against what she would have been advised by a lawyer representing her. I am not sure that either of them had separate counsel, but Wade at least seemed prepared. Willis, whose decision to talk came right before she walked up the witness chair, did not seem prepared at all, which is not surprising. It did not sound like she rehearsed answering the questions that could have been asked, and certainly it didn’t sound like she was given (or was following) advice on how to be a good witness. Yet, you would think she would know this, as county district attorney, so perhaps there was method to her madness. I guess we will see.

She is very feisty. You can imagine her as a prosecutor. She also has an interesting background. Her parents divorced when she was fairly young and she was raised primarily by her father, with whom she is very close and with whom she lived for a while. Her father, who had a career as a criminal defense lawyer here in DC, was – prior to that – a founder and active member of the Black Panthers, but one of its most moderate members who left the organization when Fani was a baby.

Whether any of this will have any effect on the Trump case (and it will, if they are forced to recuse themselves in favor of brand new attorneys) is yet to be seen. The best guess seems to be that they will be castigated for their bad behavior, but not forced out of the case.

This we shall see.