The situation worsened when the White House opened the door to indict President-elect Donald Trump on election interference charges in Georgia.
A Fulton County judge has ordered District Attorney Fani Willis to serve on a special House committee that investigated the mostly peaceful protests at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, alleging that President Trump illegally obtained classified information. He ordered that all communications with special prosecutor Jack Smith, who brought the charges, be turned over to Judicial Watch. submission of documents to the Mar-a-Lago estate, and a conspiracy to deceive the United States about his actions after the 2020 election.
This means that Judicial Watch will uncover the extent, if any, of collusion between Willis, Smith and congressional Democrats to prosecute Trump.
Petitions to court are ignored
For Willis, the problems began on Aug. 22, 2023, when he is credibly accused of violating legal ethics by not recusing himself from Trump's lawsuit. That's when Judicial Watch filed a public records request for “all documents and communications sent to and from Mr. Trump.” Or anything related to Smith and his office and the J6 committee. ”
Willis' office responded the next day saying it had received the request. Later that day, the company claimed that “(we) have no record of the response.”
Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit alleging that “plaintiffs subsequently learned that the county's representation that it did not have records to respond to the request was likely false.”
The lawsuit cites a letter from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) to Willis, in which Willis is the J6 Committee Chairman and former Mississippi insurgent activist. It also included a letter he wrote to Bennie Thompson.
Willis' letter “was my formal request for access to records that may be relevant to our criminal investigation,” she wrote. These records include, but are not limited to, recordings and transcriptions of witness interviews and depositions, electronic and printed records of communications, and travel records. ”
The letter also asked for a “face-to-face” meeting with the commission's investigators.
The lawsuit, filed on March 11, required Willis to respond within 30 days, but she did not.
In May, Judicial Watch asked Judge Robert C. I. McBurney to find Mr. Willis in default and order the records released.
The judge handed down the decision on Monday. “The court finds that the defendant has been in default since April 11, 2024,” Judge McBurney ruled.
The ruling means Willis violated the state's open records law. Now, she must submit all requested documents within five days unless she withholds the records in accordance with state law.
Similarly, the judge set a hearing for Dec. 20 to determine Judicial Watch's legal costs.
Of course, none of this would matter if Willis did not violate the state's open records law and refuse to provide the materials requested by Judicial Watch.
ethical concerns
Willis' letter to Thompson makes clear that her office's claim that it has no records in response to Judicial Watch's requests is almost certainly false. But that falsehood is just the latest behavior by Ms. Willis that raises concerns about her ethics.
In March, liberal legal commentator Jonathan Turley said Willis should recuse himself from the case against Trump because he hired his girlfriend, Nathan Wade, as a special prosecutor and paid exorbitant legal fees. said. After that, the lovers went on expensive cruises and vacations.
Lawyers for the defendants in the case moved to have Willis removed on the grounds of extramarital affairs, but Judge Scott McAfee declined to do so. But he said the Willis and Wade cases were inappropriate. Similarly, the court ruled that Willis' public assertions about the defendants, that their allegations were racially motivated, were “legally inappropriate.” McAfee said either Wade or Willis would need to resign from the case. Wade quickly did so, but Willis recklessly stayed put.
Despite McAfee's ruling, Turley said he was required to resign due to attorney ethics rules.
Willis and Wade's “personal dispute” “derailed the case and scandalized the prosecution,” Turley wrote.
Ethically, this should not have been a difficult problem. They should have stepped aside.
That conclusion is clear in Judge McAfee's rulings, which crush their claims on the witness stand and outside the courtroom.
The court called Willis' controversial church speech “a racist act designed to cast a racial slur on the accused defendant's decision to file a pretrial motion.” states.
“I can't imagine how a prosecutor with even a modicum of ethics could have stayed on the case after (McAfee's) damning opinion,” Turley wrote of X. “Mr. Willis has consistently put his personal interests ahead of those of his firm.”
Other critics
Another critic was a former U.S. attorney appointed by President Barack Obama.
“I want to tell her to get out of this case,” Michael Moore told CNN, citing the scandal.
I really think that this type of case with these charges is the most serious case for any prosecutor. And I think it's probably, at this point, to preserve the case and show that what's most important to her are the facts of the Trump case, not her political career.
Mr. Willis filed more than 30 charges against Mr. Trump and other defendants, but judges dismissed six of them.
She accused President Trump of violating the state's RICO law by asking state officials to “find” the votes needed to defeat Biden in the 2020 election.
In February, Breitbart revealed what prosecutors said was a new Biden Mafia conspiracy. Officials told the website it was “100% certain” that the White House placed Deputy District Attorney Jeff DeSantis in Willis' office to get Trump.
“He's the one,” a source told the website. “He's pulling all the strings.”
Breitbart revealed in March that DeSantis' business partner was a member of the Biden campaign through his company and a top vendor who raised nearly $9 million from Biden's failed presidential campaign. did.
Smith ended his case against Trump on Nov. 5 after Trump crushed Vice President Harris.