Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee is expected to issue his ruling soon on whether to disqualify District Attorney Fani Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade from the racketeering case against former President Donald Trump in Georgia.
What’s more, conservative radio star Megyn Kelly said McAfee may have just given an interview dropping a hint about his upcoming ruling.
McAffee’s hint comes after 10 days after closing arguments were heard on the disqualification motion filed by Trump’s legal team.
McAffee is up for re-election on May 21, and two new challengers have entered the race just in the last 10 days.
For example, civil rights attorney Robert Patillo — a local Democratic leader — recently qualified as a candidate for the Fulton County bench.
The 34-year-old judge was initially appointed by Republican Governor Brian Kemp in 2022 to a partial two-year term.
While judicial races in Georgia are technically nonpartisan, the district leans heavily Democratic. President Joe Biden received 73% of the vote there in 2020. Patillo has previously run for office as a Democrat.
In a recent radio interview, Patillo referred to the hearing on disqualifying the prosecutors as a “clown show”, implying proceedings in McAfee’s courtroom were partisan.
In his own interview on the local Atlanta radio show, The Shelly Wynter Show, McAfee discussed the upcoming election challenge —
WYNTER: Do you feel that Patillo’s run is being backed by Fani Willis… that this is a pressure campaign to force you to, and I’m doing air quotes, ‘do the right thing’ or ‘make the right right decision’? Do you feel that way?
MCAFEE: No… I think he seems sincere, so I’m not the type that I’m going to presume the worst of that sort… The biggest thing that I wanted to come on and make sure I told you today is that even if it is, it doesn’t matter because it is absolutely not going to play into my decision in any way.
No job is worth my integrity and, you know, when you ask that question what I think about is, you know, I’ve got two kids – five and three. They’re too young to have any idea of what’s going on or what I do. But what I’m looking forward to one day is maybe they will grow up a little bit and they ask me about it. And I’m looking forward to looking them in the eye and telling them I played it straight and I did the best I could.
MacAffee was asked about the timing of his ruling, and implied his decision may come as soon as Friday.
WYNTER: Can you tell us… are you anywhere closer to that two-week decision on the election interference? Are we closer to that? Are we sooner than two weeks or outside of two weeks? How are we looking?
MCAFEE: I gave myself a deadline because I knew everyone wanted an answer. And I’ll tell you, an order like this takes time to write. There’s a lot that needs to– I have to go through. And so, you know, I’ve had, again I’ll emphasize this: I’ve had a rough draft and an outline before I ever heard a rumor that someone wanted to run for this position, so the result is not going to change because of politics. I am calling it as best I can in the law as I understand it. So, I still feel like I’m on track to having that done by the deadline that I put on myself.
Megyn asked attorneys Dave Aronberg and Mike Davis about the interview — and what it may reveal about his ruling on Willis.
Kelly asked the lawyers about the “interesting” timing of McAffee’s ruling on Willis, and if they were concerned that politics would play a deep part in his decision.
“I am very concerned about the politics here,” Davis told Kelly.
“The fact is that he said he was going to wait two weeks to make his decision and during that two weeks was the filing deadline to figure out whether he was going to get a challenger and, sure as hell, he got a Democrat challenger,” Davis said.
Trump’s lawyers have argued that Willis, who is overseeing the wide-ranging probe into alleged election interference in Georgia, should be disqualified due to hosting a political fundraiser for a rival of the former president.
They have also claimed her relationship with Nathan Wade, a prosecutor on the case who was hired despite having a sexual relationship with Willis, represents a conflict of interest.
But Aronberg said he wasn’t convinced that Willis would be removed.
“It’s funny that I am the one defending the Federalist Society judge … I like what he’s done… People on my side of the aisle have been critical of him, saying he’s allowed this to become a circus,” Aronberg said. “But I don’t agree. I don’t blame him for that.”
“Remember, it was Nathan Wade who submitted the sworn affidavit saying the relationship didn’t start until afterwards and [he] got repaid half,” Aronberg told Kelly.
“Because they did that, that made the issue of lying important,” he said. “That’s why [the judge] had to do all of these interviews and hearings, and so on.”
A ruling against Willis and Wade could significantly impair the Trump investigation’s trajectory — and would set back the prosecution of Trump significantly.
A ruling in favor of Willis and Wade, allowing them to continue to lead the prosecution of Trump, could shake faith in the judicial system.
The Horn editorial team