This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A key constitutional expert who has testified before Congress is suggesting it's time for Fulton County DA Fani Wilson to be removed from the county's case against President Donald Trump and more than a dozen others.
The case essentially alleges an organized crime ring was assembled to try to take the 2020 presidential election away from Joe Biden.
In his online commentary, Jonathan Turley wrote, "The best way to protect this prosecution — and the office — is for her to step aside and allow justice to take its course.."
In fact, he said while the removal of Willis wouldn't necessarily end the case, another prosecutor "might not share her priorities."
"The question is whether there would be the same overriding interest in bagging Trump under this novel alleged criminal enterprise," he explained, noting that Willis appears to have made the case very personal.
The opinion is the result of multiple scandals that have appeared in Willis' career in just the last few days.
What is evident so far is that Willis hired a private lawyer not an expert in RICO cases to build one against Trump. Then she authorized more than $600,000 in payments to him, and he ended up becoming her alleged lover, paying for exotic trips for the two.
Then Willis also hired the paramour's law partner and paid him some $150,000. Then Willis publicly accused the wife of her alleged paramour, Nathan Wide, of trying to interfere in the prosecution of the case against Trump.
The Wades are involved in a messy divorce, and Nathan Wade already has been found in contempt, while Willis has been ordered to testify.
Turley explained, "This month, however, Willis has seemingly imploded with an ethical scandal which, unlike Trump’s prior claims, appears perhaps to be more well-founded, as it appears in an official court filing. It involves reports of an intimate relationship with Nathan Wade, appointed by Willis as lead prosecutor in the Trump case."
He continued, "The Georgia courts have established that a district attorney should be disqualified when there is a personal interest in the defendant’s conviction (Whitworth v. State, 275 Ga. App. 790, 793, 622 S.E.2d 21 [2005]). In this instance, Willis has staked much of her career on this case and appointed a prosecutor who’s alleged to be romantically involved with her; likewise, if the allegations are true, Willis may have an interest in furthering Wade’s career and benefits. Of course, Trump, the other defendants, and the public are entitled to disinterested prosecutors in this major case."
He explained, "Moreover, the Fulton County Code of Laws § 2-66 bars conflicts of interest 'in fact and in appearance.' It expressly states that no '\officer or employee shall, by his or her conduct, give reasonable basis for the impression that any person can improperly influence him or her, or unduly enjoy his or her favor, in the performance of any official acts or actions.' These provisions are in addition to prohibitions on the receipt of gifts due to one’s office, such as possibly receiving alleged lavish vacations paid for by your subordinate."
The scandals appeared to start unraveling Willis' career when Michael Roman, a Trump co-defendant, filed a motion asking for her removal and dismissal of the case because of Willis' scandals.
"If these allegations are true, Willis is not just outside of the ethical navigational beacons. She is off the map," Turley said.
Worse, too, she took to the pulpit of the Bethel AME Church in Atlanta to publicly argue for herself, he noted.
"She did not deny having an intimate relationship with Wade. Instead, she claimed that the criticism was due to their race. After all, she noted, her critics are not questioning the two white people she appointed. However, she failed to mention the salient fact — that she was not allegedly involved romantically with the other two prosecutors."
He noted, "All of this leads to an inescapable conclusion: Both Willis and Wade should recuse themselves from the case. Their continuation in the case undermines the prosecution and is clearly not in the public interest."
