News
After salacious hearing, can Fani Willis regain control of Trump case?
Fani Willis spent Thursday morning pacing in her office.
Nearby, in courtroom 5A in the Fulton county justice center, Nathan Wade, a special prosecutor, was testifying about their romantic relationship as part of a high-stakes hearing over whether or not Willis should be disqualified from handling the wide-ranging election-interference case against Donald Trump and 14 co-defendants.
After Wade finished testifying, a little before 3pm, Willis entered the courtroom herself. As her lawyers began to toss out arguments about why she should not have to take the stand, Willis waved them aside.
“I’m ready to go,” she said.
After weeks of salacious accusations, this was the equivalent of a prizefighter eager to get into the ring and throw a punch. This was Willis, the longstanding pugilistic prosecutor, determined to win back her credibility and control of the case. Over the next two hours, Willis made it clear she was there to fight for the years-long case against Trump she has spent nearly her entire time as district attorney working on.
She cut into defense lawyers when they tried to ask her simple questions (“It’s highly offensive when someone lies on you,” she said at one point). Court briefly moved to a recess as she shouted “it is a lie” at defense attorneys. Most significantly, she forcefully rebutted the allegations against her and categorically denied that she and Wade had begun their relationship before he was hired in November 2021. She laid out how she had repaid Wade in cash for travel he had purchased on her behalf. She unequivocally rebuffed the allegation that she and Wade lived together.
At the end of the first day of a two-day hearing, defense lawyers had failed to produce any bombshell allegations demonstrably proving that Willis financially benefitted from her relationship with Wade.
While that may allow Willis to survive the disqualification hearing and continue on the case, it may also be beside the point by the time Judge Scott McAfee rules. In the court of public opinion,Trump’s defense lawyers may have already won. Just as they have done for weeks, they used Thursday’s hearing to undermine Willis’s judgment and give the impression that Willis and Wade had been trying to conceal their relationship.
“I think it was a lot of mud-slinging with too little clarity,” said Anthony Michael Kreis, a law professor at Georgia State University.
Defense lawyers used the hearing to draw attention away from the anti-democracy issues at the heart of the case, and focused on a romantic relationship. It’s the kind of muddying of the waters that Trump has mastered in political life. Unsurprisingly, Trump sent out a campaign email in the middle of the hearing with the subject line “Fanni [sic] Willis Bombshell – Corrupt as Hell!”
There isn’t sophistication to this strategy: a romantic relationship is more interesting and entertaining than a legal debate about a conflict of interest. That’s why defense lawyers pressed Wade to testify about when exactly he was having sexual intercourse with Willis. It’s why they repeatedly brought up a court filing in his divorce case when he said he hadn’t been with anyone during his marriage (Wade testified he believed his marriage to be over in 2015). It’s why Scott Sadow, Trump’s attorney, repeatedly pressed Willis on why she didn’t disclose to anyone on the prosecution team Wade was leading that the two of them were dating. Willis said that she doesn’t discuss her personal life openly. “Our relationship wasn’t a secret. It was just private,” Wade said.
For all of the innuendo thrown around at Thursday’s hearing, two issues seem likely to stick.
The first is testimony from a former friend of Willis’s, Robin Bryant-Yeartie, who testified she had “no doubt” that Willis and Wade began dating before Willis hired Wade in November 2021. Willis’s team plans to introduce witnesses on Friday to undercut Bryant-Yeartie’s credibility, and has already suggested that Willis and Bryant-Yeartie, who worked at the district attorney’s office, had a falling out that may have been related to something at work.
The second issue is the repayment system Wade and Willis had for travel they took together. Even though Wade paid for trips on his credit card, Willis said she would repay him for travel in cash or pay for activities and other expenses that roughly equaled the travel. The two would rotate paying the bill at restaurants. It’s an arrangement familiar to many couples and friends, but defense lawyers highlighted that it was unusual for the district attorney of Fulton county, who is required to disclose certain gifts.
Willis tried to remind the American public that the proceedings were a distraction from the core issues in the case: an attempt to overthrow democracy. “Ms Merchant’s interests are contrary to democracy your honor, not to mine,” she said, referring to Ashleigh Merchant, a lawyer for one of Trump’s co-defendants.
“You’re confused … I’m not on trial,” Willis said at another point. “These people are on trial for trying to steal an election in 2020.”
Like it or not, Willis has moved to the center of the case. It’s unclear whether she’ll be able to successfully leave the witness box and return to the prosecutor’s table.
News
Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP
The Supreme Court
Win McNamee/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Win McNamee/Getty Images
The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits.
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.”
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced.
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor said that if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.”
Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow. Earlier last month the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map. California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district. Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
News
Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California
Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown. The New York Times
A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.
The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.
As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.
Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.
News
US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets
The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.
“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.
“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.
In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.
“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.
Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.
This story has been updated.
-
World5 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts6 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Denver, CO6 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana1 week agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
Oregon4 days ago2026 OSAA Oregon Wrestling State Championship Results And Brackets – FloWrestling