Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis observed the hearing on the Georgia election interference case in Atlanta on Friday, March 1, 2024.
According to a court filing on Monday, evidence has surfaced suggesting that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade began their romantic relationship several years before they claimed it started.
In a last-minute move, David Shafer, the former Georgia GOP chairman and co-defendant in the racketeering and election interference case brought by Willis against Donald Trump, has filed a motion to reopen the evidence. This motion aims to subpoena a new witness and adds to the ongoing efforts to disqualify Willis from the case. Prosecutors argue that Shafer played a crucial role in the fraudulent electors scheme.
Shafer’s attorney, Craig Gillen, has filed a motion that introduces a new witness. This witness is expected to support the claims made by Terrence Bradley regarding the timeline of the District Attorney’s relationship with the individual she appointed to handle a significant criminal case in Georgia’s history. Moreover, the motion states that the new witness will contradict a crucial aspect of Bradley’s testimony concerning the nature of his previous allegations.
Co-Chief Deputy District Attorney for Cobb County, Cindi Lee Yeager, had a phone conversation with two defense attorneys after witnessing Bradley’s testimony. During the conversation, Yeager expressed her disagreement with several statements made by Nathan Wade’s former divorce attorney and law partner, as mentioned in the filing.
Related Coverage:
In text messages to defense attorney Ashleigh Merchant, Bradley confirmed that they had indeed started dating before Willis hired Wade. He expressed confidence that their affair had commenced during Willis’ time as a municipal court judge, adding a touch of romance to the years 2019-2020.
During his testimony last week, Bradley appeared to be evasive. He avoided giving clear answers and tried to obscure his previous statements by suggesting they were based on a single conversation with Wade, and were merely speculative in nature. Additionally, he adamantly refused to provide a specific date for when the relationship started, claiming that he couldn’t remember why he had previously seemed so certain about the timeline.
According to the filing, Yeager asserts that Bradley made multiple statements on the stand that directly contradict the conversations they had between August 2023 and January 2024.
According to the filing, Mr. Wade was indeed involved in a romantic relationship with Ms. Willis while she was campaigning for District Attorney in 2019 through 2020. Mr. Bradley, who informed Yeager, confirmed that he had firsthand knowledge of the relationship between Mr. Wade and District Attorney Willis.
Closing arguments have already taken place in the disqualification case. However, this does not pose a significant obstacle if Judge Scott McAfee of Fulton County Superior Court determines that Yeager’s evidence should be heard under oath. In Georgia, trial court judges have the authority to reopen the evidentiary record at their discretion.
In this case, both the state and Trump himself have requested, before Shafer’s filing, that the evidence be reopened. McAfee stated last week that it would likely take him approximately two weeks to make a final ruling on the motion to disqualify Willis and her office.
During the closing arguments, the state repeatedly pointed to the testimony of Robin Yeartie, a former employee of the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office, who stated that she and Willis had been close friends. Yeartie testified on the first day of the hearing, revealing that Willis and Wade’s romantic relationship began in late 2019.
During the hearings, both the prosecutors and the defense discussed the allegations that Willis and Wade utilized a condominium rented by Yeartie as a place for romantic rendezvous. The defense obtained legally obtained cellular phone records that indicated Wade had visited the condo several times and potentially stayed overnight on two occasions before the affair officially started.
In the Shafer filing, it is mentioned that Bradley informed Yeager about the specifics of Willis and Wade’s utilization of Ms. Robin Yeartie’s apartment and their previous meetings before November 2021.
The defense’s main argument for removing Willis and Wade revolves around the district attorney’s hiring of her then-boyfriend for the position in November 2021 and the potential financial benefits she gained from it.
The Shafer filing only makes indirect references, if any, to the financial aspect of the allegations against the prosecutors.
However, the financial aspect of the recent defense motion presents a potential challenge for Willis herself.
Bradley conveyed during his testimony that he had minimal interaction with Willis. During his appearance on the stand, he stated that he didn’t personally know her and that he never engaged in phone conversations with her.
Yeager’s filing will directly contradict Bradley’s in-court estimation of his relationship with Willis.
The motion, finally, reads as follows (emphasis in the original):
In or around September of 2023, Mr. Bradley was visiting Ms. Yeager in her office when Mr. Bradley received a telephone call. Ms. Yeager could hear that the caller was District Attorney Willis. District Attorney Willis was calling Mr. Bradley in response to an article that was published about how much money Mr. Wade and his law partners had been paid in this case. Ms. Yeager heard District Attorney Willis tell Mr. Bradley: “They are coming after us. You don’t need to talk to them about anything about us.”
Defense attorneys have attempted to exploit allegations that Wade was compensated excessively for his services and lacks the necessary qualifications for the job he was supposedly hired to do by his former girlfriend. However, these arguments have failed to gain much traction in Judge McAfee’s courtroom.
The alleged claim made by Yeager regarding the phone call is not the main concern here. What is more important is whether Bradley misrepresented his connection with the district attorney and if the district attorney’s office failed to rectify the information provided to the court. If the judge deems Yeager, a prosecutor from a neighboring jurisdiction, to be a reliable witness, this could lead to significant repercussions for the prosecution.
Read More:
- Missouri Rent Increase Laws 2024: What Tenants Should Know
- Maryland Rent Increase Laws 2024: What Tenants Should Know