will keep kids in school, too. now you don't have to run and jump into the pros. >> brian: congratulations to your success. a great role model and better dad. thank you. best of luck. talk to you on radio. meanwhile we have a fox news alert. this just in let's learn together. a judge has ruled that georgia d.a. fani willis can stay on the trump election case if she removes wade. that according to nbc's reporting. the case goes forward without nathan wade, who was the boyfriend prior but they broke up and she claims that had nothing to do with this case. the judge feels differently. most importantly fani willis stays so the court case you imagine stays on track. thanks so much for watching. now over to a very special show with two great anchors. >> bill: thank you, guys. good morning. the news is in according to report in atlanta, georgia.

they gave word what the judge has decided. fani willis can decide if she wants to stay or leave the case and take nathan wade with her. so we're waiting for more information on this. welcome to friday. dana has the day off today. i'm bill hemmer live in new york city with my friend and colleague in tow. it will be a ride. >> dana: it is. we're getting big news this morning. i'm martha maccallum and this, of course, is "america's newsroom." we understand as you just pointed out, bill, that this decision is in. judge mcphee gave himself a two week deadline. that landed today. we've come to know this judge a little bit over the course of the last couple of months. scott mcafee. whether to disqualify fani willis in response to allegations that she was dating

her lead prosecutor when she hired him and that was part of a motivation for hiring him and the two took some rather fancy vacations together and that they may have benefited financially from this business arraignment which it was alleged she created for that purpose. >> bill: donald trump's team and co-defendants say it is a disqualifying conflict of interest. the case should be thrown out because of it. all these allegations prompting heated testimony. we watched it live. you will hear now from one of the first witnesses on behalf of trump's attorneys. she is now a former friend and former colleague of fani willis. she was emphatic saying she remembered the timeline and she remembered the action when she asked her questions about nathan wade. >> and do you understand it that their relationship began in 2019 and continued until the last time you spoke with her? >> yes.

>> as it relates to having the 2022 relationship with district attorney willis, i want to say because my marriage was broken, i was free to have a relationship. >> in truth in two people's personal lives you are con vised. you think i'm on trial. these people are on trial for trying to steal an election. i'm not on trial no matter how hard you put me on trial. a man is not a plan, a man is a companion. >> martha: that is just a slice of what we got from the d.a. fani willis in georgia through the course of all of this. we have analysis from former federal prosecutor and first to jonathan serrie covering this case all along in atlanta. big morning, jonathan. >> very big morning. the story is unfolding as we speak. the atlanta journal constitution is reporting that fulton county district attorney fani willis

has been ordered to either step aside or she has to cut ties with her special prosecutor in the case, nathan wade, before the case can go to trial. attorneys for former president trump and several of his associates had asked the judge to disqualify the d.a. from prosecuting the case. they argue willis's romantic relationship with prosecutor wade creates a conflict of interest. willis and wade have testified under oath the relationship began after willis hired him but willis also faces challenges outside the courtroom. take a listen. >> the biggest risk that fani willis has are political in nature. she has an election coming up which is now contested both in the primary and general election. >> and as for the case itself, judge mcafee struck down six counts against former president

trump and five associates saying the prosecution failed to provide enough details on how the defendants allegedly committed the crimes. now if willis remains on this case, if she remains the chief prosecutor, she will have to decide whether she appeals that decision on the six counts, whether she seeks a new indictment or whether she goes ahead and prosecutes the case on the remaining 35 charges. according to this reporting by the atlanta journal constitution, d.a. fani willis has a major decision to make, whether she removes herself from the case or cuts ties with special prosecutor nathan wade. back to you guys. >> bill: a couple of things. do you know when the judge will be in court? will it be today or not? based on the reporting, it is slim thus far, do we know if he gave her a deadline to give him an answer, meaning the judge?

>> we don't know about a deadline. this ruling was issued by the judge outside of the courtroom, entered in the computer system. it has just now appeared and we're now scouring it along with the rest of you trying to figure out the details. >> bill: we'll give you some space to get that done, jonathan. thank you with the breaking news. andrew here in studio, you have been with us from the beginning on this case. welcome back. on face value what do you make of the judge's decision to allow her to decide? >> the idea she could kick off wade and keep willis on the case. i had an issue with that. that means the credibility of the testimony in court from willis and wade mattered. it mattered when the relationship began otherwise wade wouldn't be disqualified. there will be details in the ruling that talks about why willis can remain on if wade leaves. but to the bottom line of it

rick it mattered and it seemed to matter to the judge that wade had this relationship and the timing and credibility in the courtroom. >> martha: an excellent point. she, according to a lot of the testimony that we heard from her friends and others who testified that the relationship did begin before fani willis admitted to if they were correct and if there is a reason to remove wade, then she was in the engineering of all of that. why would she be left on the case? >> you would hope that prosecutors are held to the standard of being truthful at all times in all they say. here the judge may have kind of figured out a path to giving less weight or less importance to the testimony that happened in court and the bickering that went back and forth who is telling the truth and who is not telling the truth. one of the issues in georgia law regarding prosecutorial misconduct, it must affect the outcome of the case. not essentially the beginning of the case but the verdict in the

case. perhaps he navigated that piece of it. >> bill: rico matter involves a lot of people and can be very complicated. a portion of the order says the court concludes that the prosecution of this case cannot proceed until the state selects one of two options. at the moment we know there will be yet another delay in fulton county. >> probably why the ruling came out a couple days ago dismissing the six charges. wanted to get ahead of it before the case is put on pause. fani willis has to make a detailed decision whether she wants to remain on. also the decision that has to be made about whether to issue a superseding indictment on the dismissed charges giving more detail. it was dismissed because there wasn't enough factual basis in the charges as alleged. she could do a reindictment on those pushing back the trial date or could try to appeal that decision but i don't think that can even happen now the case appears to be stayed until a decision is made. >> martha: judging from what you

saw in the courtroom and having watched a lot of people in courtrooms, it doesn't look like she is going to remove herself from this case. would you be surprised if that happened? >> i would be shocked. this is personal to her it seems. political to her it seems. aggressive prosecutors are an important function in our country at state, local and federal levels. but when those interests of prosecutors going beyond just the idea of upholding the law but appear to be personal and political that is where we have real problems. >> bill: brian robinson joins us now. are you in atlanta at the moment? welcome to our coverage. you know the players, you know georgia law. your reaction on the decision so far. >> bill, you remember that two weeks ago, when i was on with you, i said the judge is going to get through qualifying week when candidates sign up to run for office. he is a candidate on the ballot in fulton county this year, heavily democratic county.

i think he would come back this week and rule that fanny could stay on the case but wade would have to go. obviously the judge thinks that there was a conflict, otherwise we could have had the status quo. so there will be the question raised, if it's a conflict for her why not for her? >> bill: a couple questions about the judge. is it fair to assume the following. if the judge determined they lied, he would have no choice, right? they would both be off the case. but if he keeps her on, then he has determined they did not lie or maybe she didn't lie, and that the timeline that was presented in court is accurate. does that make sense to you? >> it does not, bill. again, as we discussed here two weeks ago, when we heard the testimony from nathan wade's law partner it did not pass the smell test. he has spoken very emphatically and clearly about the

relationship starting in 2019. the statements made by wade and willis contradict that. and there is a strong sense that they perjured themselves in that testimony. so the judge is splitting the baby to use the term just used here. if we remove wade we have removed the conflict and we can get back to the starting point. i think that's going to give the defendants a lot of ammunition moving forward not just in a court, bill, but also the court of public opinion, which is probably more important in this particular case given the election season we're in. >> bill: last question for you. the first witness we just played sound from a moment ago, former office mate and friend was emphatic on the dates. do you conclude she lied? >> fani willis? >> bill: the first witness for trump's team, the former office mate and friend, when she

testified about when the relationship began. >> right. i do think that someone lied on the stand about when the relationship began. i do think the defense put forward a very compelling argument, granted much of it is circumstantial. the cell phone data showing where nathan wade was near fani willis's condo, that is circumstantial but it wasn't the only piece of evidence. when you put it together one-by-one the eyewitness testimony of them kissing and hugging. law partner saying it started in 2019 in text messages with defense attorneys. that's not just a one-off that's a lot of circumstantial evidence that it would take a lot of suspension of disbelief to believe that they didn't lie. >> bill: stand by. thank you for that jumping on quickly in georgia, brian robinson. martha has more as we continue. >> martha: jonathan turley is with us on the phone.

good morning. good to have you with us. your headline take as you take all of this in this morning. >> we've been talking about this possibility of a solomon type of ruling by the court. the reason it's attractive it avoids the cliff problem. if he took willis off the case he would have to take the entire office out of the mix. he would have to reassign this to another set of prosecutors. that would cause considerable delay and could also cause the dismissal of the case if those new prosecutors looked at this racketeering theory and said, like many of like us it doesn't hold together very well. it avoided the cliff but not the questions that will inevitably come up. it is like finding two people in a bank vault and taking one off to jail. the question is, you know, the

appearance problem that the judge identified with regard to wade was directly related to his relationship with willis. they both testified in the same way. they were the two parts of this relationship. yet only one of them was disqualified. so that's going to lead to these questions. well, why should willis escape that same penalty? the opinion leaves us feeling like the court went and shot the wounded. >> martha: it's a great question and there is always the question, unfortunately, of politics and the influence of politics potentially on this. because these are elected officials up for election again in may. i believe all the people involved here are up, including the judge, up for election in may. that may be why the judge wanted to speak on his own behalf before this decision came down and he spoke with wsbtv and what he said.

the message i want to convey is no ruling of mine is ever going to be based on politics. i'm going to be following the law the best i understand it. i just focus on the job i'm doing. incredibly grateful for the last year i have been able to do this. i took this job not because i wanted to score partisan political points, didn't go looking for the spotlight. i love the law and giving people their day in court and being efficient about it. jonathan, there will be speculation that this was a political move on his part. the easier road for him to take in many ways to leave fani willis in this spot but judging based on what you watched in the courtroom, do you think that's fair? >> well, i have to say that i've been praising the judge. i still believe that he has conducted himself in a fair and professional way. i think that this does take an element of courage for an elected state judge because many people in fulton county are not going to like the fact that he just disqualified wade and gave

credence to this theory of an improper relationship and appearance issue that does touch upon willis and her office. that's all for the good. the problem is the disjointed aspect of the opinion itself. it doesn't really hold together that well. the big question was, what is the standard? is it just an appearance or do you have to show an actual conflict? he indicates that he believes it is indeed the appearance standard. well if that's the case, i don't see how willis could escape disqualification. many people believe that both of these prosecutors lied on the stand. that there were false statements submitted to courts. the key about that is willis and wade are prosecuting people in this case for that very conduct. and so it is hard to see how willis continuing the case does not undermine it in the eyes of the public and hurts the case

overall. in some ways this result may actually appeal to trump and his defendants. they established that there was an improper relationship, at least for the purposes of disqualification. and they left a wounded willis to continue on in the case. and she will stand accused of false statements as she p prosecutes others for that kind of conduct. there are state efforts to investigate this including possible bar issues. >> martha: the trump team now has the option to question her credibility all throughout the course of this based on some of what we've seen so far. >> bill: so the wheels haven't fallen off entirely but sure are wobbly at the moment. paul mauro joins us now by phone. good morning to you. just heard jonathan mention that the other investigation that's

currently underway, the senate in georgia has its own investigation going. and the governor could weighas . where do those stand at the moment, paul? >> that is the real danger here, i would say, for the judge. because the senate can always subpoena documents and if at some point the senate goes so far in their investigation as to go beyond interviewing witnesses and looking at what has already been unearthed and managed to get themselves to the reportedly 10,000 text messages, 10,000 of the 12,000 contacts that willis and wade had are text messages. the senate gets to that material and gets that content, then there is a very good chance in my opinion we're going to see the kind of conflict that demonstrates there was indeed a

relationship that the two of them have denied. and that actually could arise during this prosecution, in which case the judge will be looking at a situation where everything he just exonerated willis on is going to be glaringly obvious and will have to revisit the same issues. as jonathan said, there will be a lot of question about how he could manage to split the baby here and say that okay, i'm going to knock out wade and keep willis, when to be blunt about it, it takes two to tango. >> bill: it is a little confounding at the moment and maybe clarification throughout the morning. thank you, we'll come back to you shortly. andrew is with us still. you look at the order from the judge. what does he say about the financial incentive or payments that may or may not have been raised for nathan wade during this? >> what the judge is saying is that most importantly the court

finds that the based on the district attorney's testimony that the evidence demonstrates the financial gain flowing from her relationship with wade, which he says is a few hundred dollars was not a motivating factor on the part of the district attorney to indict and prosecute this case. what we have here is the judge finding there is no actual conflict of interest. he then goes on to then assess the implied conflict of interest and he is essentially giving willis and wade a break. >> bill: why would he demand wade is off the case. >> it turns out that the appearance of wade's role on the case is problematic versus willis, who was part of this from the beginning before wade was particularly involved. she is the prosecutor in the role. the judge also says that wade's billing of hours is not inherently a problem. that attorneys for the history

of time have always had this debate about the benefit they get from billing extra hours. he was not particularly compelled by many of the argument of trump and the co-defendants. >> martha: if he is saying the fact that she didn't hustle to hire him as this trump case was coming together so that he would be part of it with her, and reap financial gain from everything that was surrounding this case. he is separating it. >> my initial review of it i saw a line from the judge essentially saying that fani willis has not tried to delay the case and that kind of goes against the argument that the defendants have made that willis was looking for wade and herself to gain additional benefits by prolonging the case. >> bill: we'll dig into the order more. bret baier, your initial reaction to the breaking news now. >> well good morning, guys. i think it's interesting to see this judge, after all that we saw in that hearing, come to

this mark where it's okay that fani willis can stay on but they have to separate nathan wade from the case. i think that the actual statute says the appearance of impropriety. after all we witnessed and saw and the evidence that was presented, boy, it sure did seem like they had a relationship that they said they didn't on the stand. so to jonathan's point earlier i think you may have to deal with this down the road if other evidence surfaces, like those text messages as mentioned. politically, i think the trump legal team probably wanted to see this pushed or falling apart and delayed. this seems to keep it on track but it is a very, very complicated case and fani willis is now vulnerable to a lot of attacks just judging by what she said and did on the stand.

so the case does not seem as solid as it did heading into it months and months ago. >> bill: let me read this headline. "the new york times" did the analysis this morning and it is on their webpage now in the newspaper. here is the headline on this. all four criminal cases against donald trump have become mired in issues that have pushed back the start of trials, end quote. that's a fact. and bret now with this breaking news here is another one. >> yeah. and it is a race against the clock here. i think that's what we're seeing. there is this push to get one of these trials to come to the fore and be decided before the election. it is hard to see how that really happens. even in manhattan now with new documents from the feds mean it is another 30-day delay and possibly beyond that.

it is like two trains on the track running against each other and we'll see when that collision happens. it might be after the election, which changes the dynamic completely if the former president wins. >> martha: it has always been the goal of the trump team, when confronted with 91 counts. this is an enormous barrage coming from four different directions legally and understandably to try to delay and raise questions and raise pre-trial motions in all of these to try to get this timeline to stretch out. because he is in the middle of an election. the irony, though, is whether or not some of this politically -- there are so many issues raised about the political underpinnings of some of these cases went too far and that every single -- with each indictment the former president solidified his position as the leader in this race, right?

so this has also caused to undermine many voters' opinions across the country about the justice system. get donald trump off the ballot, i think "the new york times" headline is exactly right and i think it could go further and say it has, you know, it appears that it may be spectacularly blowing up in some regards. >> i think that's exactly right and i think that it has solidified clearly the republican party. i think there are real questions about what one conviction would do to independents and suburban women and seen polls that it changes things dramatically but it has raised a lot of questions about the partisan aspect to all of this. >> bill: brett, thank you for jumping on the phone. bring back professor turley here. bob barr is a federal prosecutor out of georgia on with neil

cavuto yesterday. neil asked him why does this keep happening? the one common thread about the court cases, barr said what you'll find is liberals always overreach. that may be a legal statement, professor, may be a political statement, may be a little bit of both. what do you think about that comment on its face as we see this developing now? >> i actually think that part of what we're seeing here is the result of improvisation on the law. much of this is improv iced law. what is happening in new york with alvin bragg is improviseed to be the point of the theater of the absurd. it is using a statute in a way i don't think can be used. i would be surprised if it could be upheld. in georgia you had willis put together the most weak racketeering claim just somehow

bring together these 18 defendants into a single conspiracy. it doesn't hold well even when you read the prosecution's own papers. you are left at the end with what? it's almost a random aspect as some of these people being put into this overarching conspiracy. i think that's the problem is when you improvise you make mistakes. in fairness to the judge, he is saying i don't buy the fact that willis brought this case essentially because she was going to bring in her lover and get free trips out of it. i get that. i think it's very clear that the motivation of willis was not romantic but political. that doesn't make it any better. but i can see why the judge said i don't necessarily believe it was the purpose of the case or how the case was unfolding. my problem with the judge is

that these two prosecutors stand deeply contradicted not just by witnesses, but by cell phone evidence. i find it hard to believe that the judge accepted their testimony as completely credible. so if you believe that they may have lied on the stand, i don't see how that doesn't prove the gravitational pull to disqualify both. but there is a real advantage in splitting the baby in this way because he does avoid the necessity of driving the case over the cliff, taking out the entire office. but that will be the lingering question. i think much of what the judge says is good faith and is credible that he just didn't see the motivation of the relationship behind the case itself. the problem is what happened after the allegation.

these two prosecutors did great harm to themselves and to their office by saying things that many of us do not believe are true. >> bill: stand by, sir. we have a ton of questions. want to get back to the atlanta and jonathan serrie with more details now. what are you finding out back there? >> it seems that the judge determined that the defense, those representing former president trump and some of his associates, failed to prove that there was some financial gain, some impropriety by the romantic relationship that ensued between district attorney fani willis and her special prosecutor nathan wade but he did say that it created some potential problems as far as public perception and some interesting quotes here. he said that he referred to wade's divorce case said wade's

patently unpersuasive explanation for the inaccurate interrogatories he submitted in his pending divorce indicates a willingness on his part to wrongly conceal his relationship with the district attorney. as the case moves forward reasonable members of the public could easily be left to wonder whether the financial exchanges have continued, resulting in some form of benefit to the district attorney or even whether the romantic relationship has resumed. the judge goes on to write, put differently, an outsider could reasonably think that the district attorney is not exercising her independent professional judgment totally free of any compromising influences as long as wade remains on the case, this unnecessary perception will persist. >> bill: reasonable people persist as well. still no answer on when she needs to give the judge her

answer? >> yeah actually my understanding is that the judge has not issued a deadline for d.a. fani willis to make the decision. however, he has said that the trial against former president trump and his associates will not be able to move forward until the d.a. makes the decision whether she recuses herself and her entire office or whether nathan wade steps aside. >> bill: when you get more, come on back. >> martha: in that case, he is encouraging her to do it quickly because any hesitation on her part will cause a further delay. so they can't move forward until she makes a decision on all of this. let's bring in andrew again going through all of this and looking through these as well. it is very interesting, andrew, and you have a point of the document that you want to point out to us with regard to the appearance of a conflict of interest, but it sounds in what

jonathan just laid out there that the judge is basically saying that he felt that nathan wade didn't have credibility and that he, you know, sort of misrepresented himself and that if he is still part of this, that it will be a distraction from all of it because people will wonder if they are still having some kind of financial benefit from this. so he wants to excise him from the process for those reasons, correct? >> we're understanding how the judge split the baby and the bath water. what he said is no actual conflict but an implied conflict. the appearance of a conflict, he found that to be true. then said -- this is quite a strong statement. however, an odor of a guilty mind remains. the court isn't under obligation to ferret out every instance of that but goes on to say that wade testified untruthfully about the timing of their

relationship and further underpins impropriety and needs to make an effort to cure it. the court is essentially saying he has to cure the appearance issue that has been created by the testimony. but that doesn't mean disqualification of willis and doesn't mean disqualification of the entire office versus an actual conflict the consequence would be much greater is what the judge is saying. >> bill: in a broader sense and goes to the conversation we were having with professor turley there, the case that's been successful so far was in new york and that was the eugene carroll matter. new york state and new york city changed the statute of limitations for her to bring that case. they created a law that expired after one year and now it goes away. in the alvin bragg matter he is prosecuting trump as well on the checks that he wrote before he became president. it is my understanding that that statute of limitations had to be altered also.

so look, it almost feels like an entrapment here in new york in order to prove whatever it is you want to prove depending on the case. or carroll an allegation went back 30 years. for trump the statute of limitations was three or four years and it was altered. >> i think tweets left complaining about novel legal ideas a few years ago. now the left who is bringing novel legal theories against president trump. do i agree they are bringing novel theories? absolutely. when we look at the wade -- prosecution here in new york city, we see that they had to essentially creatively turn it into a felony in order to have the statute of limitations be sufficiently long in order to prosecute him. the nature of the case in new york is a misdemeanor case and they are createively trying to bring in federal law to essentially create this into a

felony prosecution. it is very creative. very novel. this has never been done before and never seen a president prosecuted. how could it be anything other than that? there is a lot of respect owed to the executive and presidency in america and this is a great challenge to it. i hope we get through it smoothly. every president left or right will have to go through this. >> martha: hope we get through it smoothly is the operative phrase here. the examples you just outlined. imagine for any individual in this country to be put in that situation where a statute of limitations is creatively changed in two different cases in order to get you into court in the middle of an election. and i think this is why you see a lot of people who have questions that americans have not had to this extent, i think, in the past about this whole process. and i think that is one of the reasons that you saw so much

support ironically it seems inside out but that's the way it appears to be working politically for the former president. >> any time politics are being used to prosecute we have problems. the idea, though, of statute of limitations being extended is something that is a big issue in overall judicial reform acts and what not that occurs certainly the sexual assault and sexual violence community wants the statute of limitations extended and there could be good reasons for that. i have been on the other side. >> martha: it has only been extended in this case, correct? >> well in new york the extension of the sexual violence, that statute was extended essentially for everybody. >> bill: i think we're just at the beginning it feels like unfortunately. we'll dig deeper and to everybody who is with us right now, andrew, and jonathan and jonathan and brian robinson in atlanta, stand by and we'll get a quick break here. when our coverage continues we'll try to answer as much as

we can as to when we'll get an answer from fani willis. so that is up next. i feel refreshed because i am not struggling with cpap anymore. she looks great. i got inspire. great sleep at the click of a button. did she get implants? yeah, i got an implant, sheila!! it's inspire. learn more and view important safety information at inspiresleep.com fox news is proud to bring you this she■s a hero moment. i knew i was interested in working with students who were easily excluded. part of my journey is responding to looks. we have to look out for each other. we have to take care of each other. dance is my safe space. i am autistic and i am a performer. and i'm really good at it. once we're in our own space and we get to create that space, it's really fun. i am here because i have seen women do it. if you can see her, you can be her. power outages can be unpredictable, inconvenient, and disruptive to your life, posing a real threat to your family's comfort and safety. when the power goes out, you have no lights,

no refrigeration, no heating or air conditioning. the winds are not letting up at all here. we're going to see some power outages. number one thing to prepare for is extended power outages. are you prepared? you can be with a generac home standby generator. when a power outage occurs, your generac home standby generator automatically powers up, using your home's existing natural gas or propane, so your life goes on without disruption. you and your family are comfortable, safe, and secure. stay tuned, to get over a $500 value free on the most popular home standby generator in the world. with the generac, we don't have to worry about whether we lose power or not. if the utility company does not come through, our generac does. having a generac takes a lot of the anxiety out of, there's going to be a storm. after the hurricane happened, we just want to be prepared for anything. generac generators are designed, engineered

and built in the usa. 8 out of 10 home generators are generac, and have thousands of satisfied customers. how many times have you heard people say, i never want to go through that again? well, the next time you go through it, don't make it so hard on yourself. have a generac home standby generator. call or go online now to request your free quote with one of generac's nationwide dealers. special financing and low monthly payment options are available, and if you call now, you will also receive a free 5 year warranty valued at over $500. the call is free, the quote is free, and there's no obligation to buy. call or go online now, so the next time there's a power outage, your home powers up. power your life with generac. call or go online to request your free quote today. there's an old saying in the navy that the toughest job in the navy is a navy wife. and if you've made the deployments and you've been the wife at home, or you've been the spouse at home,

you understand what i'm talking about. your spouse has earned the right to apply for a va home loan. the newday 100 loan allows you to borrow up to 100% of your home's value. so if you're in a situation where you need some help financially, give us a call. hi, i'm jason and i've lost 202 pounds on golo. so when i first started golo, i was expecting to lose around 40 pounds and then i just kept losing weight, and moving and moving and moving in a better direction. with golo and release, you're gonna lose the weight.

>> martha: breaking news, judge mcafee has made his decision and said to the attorney general there, fani willis, that she can continue on this case but that -- or she can leave. if she stays she needs to remove nathan wade from the team. so let's bring in doug collins, former congressman from georgia, and get his reaction to all of this this morning. congressman collins, good to have you with us. >> good morning. >> martha: what do you think about all this? >> i'm frustrated.

i think the judge here did a solomon decision trying to make everybody happy. the truth of the matter it's hard to do that. if you have stated in this that there are issues of credibility with both fani willis and nathan wade but yet you are siding toward the constitutional officer in georgia, the district attorney to say she can stay or let nathan wade go, really doesn't solve this issue because it is hard to believe that if you say that you are saying nathan wade is completely culpable and willis isn't. his ruling has actually said he actually stated in the ruling that there may have been entitlement to fani willis in this. the problem here is that the perception is going to be there is the side from the folks who are saying fanny should stay saying get rid of nathan wade and bring in another attorney. the other attorneys will appeal this. the problem you have going forward for fani willis. she has to make a real decision. is it worth going forward with

her at the helm with all this tonalityed and the judge saying there was a possibility of entanglement. appeals later on for a constant barrage. we haven't ruled out bar complaints and senate investigation in the state of georgia. >> martha: it's the d.a. fani willis. he points out a number of things, this judge, as you have just suggested, doug, where he says there was an appearance of a conflict of interest and as you say, he says there may have been financial gain. the timing of the hiring makes it appear, again, that it was, as the trump investigation was ramping up and there would be long hours that would be worked as a result of that, so it is very curious that he decides to leave her on the case and doesn't explain -- maybe you have seen it in the document and i haven't yet, why he has decided to allow her to stay given all of that. >> yeah, thats the part that bothers me in this case. i've reached out to a couple

other folks i know legal and professional retired judges and others to ask about this. i can't separate the fact that the action took place between two people and if the action took place between fani willis and nathan wade how can you split one without splitting the other? nathan wade leaving this case is not a death blow to this case. he can be replaced. he was the lead prosecutor all the evidence and everything else. fani willis is still the d.a. in the case. what's concerning to me and come back to haunt fani willis is not just the episode in the courtroom that day but she made a statement saying when questioned about something she said one witness can prove truth. what about her former roommate and college friend and best friend who said it happened beforehand? you have competing truths here that should have been probably fleshed out a little more. maybe the judge wants to kick it higher. there is conflict in the judges and the court's interpretation of appearance and actual

impropriety. maybe he is waiting to let the higher courts sort that out. either way it's not a good ruling for the american people or here in georgia. it continues with a dark cloud over this case. >> martha: one more quick question. what's political impact of this? we mentioned they had elections coming up for the d.a. and judge as well. what is your read on how all of that will go? >> it will be hard. fulton county is a heavily democratic county. fani willis has someone running against her and i hope it works out well. the judge has never stood for an election. he was an appointed judge last year by governor kemp. this is the first time he stood for election. right in the middle of last week a civil rights activist, someone a member of the rainbow push coalition, radio host is now challenging the judge and he specifically said he claimed this case is why he was doing it. this is a political hot potato

in fulton county and when you throw this in. what kind of pressures were there outside? >> bill: sir, thank you. come back to you in moments. a statement from trump's team. lawyers, we can put it on screen reads four sentences long. while respecting the court's decision, we believe the court did not afford appropriate significance to the prosecutorial misconduct of willis and wade including the financial benefits testifying untruthfully about their personal relationship, when it began, as well as willis's extra judicial mlk church speech where -- we'll use all legal options available as we continue to fight to end this case which should never have been brought in the first place end quote. the first reaction, andrew, what's yours today? >> the judge is actually hitting willis quite hard in the ruling. finding issues, i see here when talking about the atlanta church speech that she gave in january 14th of this year right

after the motion was filed, she refers to this and plays the race card as the judge says. he says that it was legally improper providing this type of public comment creates dangerous waters for the district attorney to wade further into. wondering if he was using a bit of a pun there. he doesn't say it is so dramatically interferes with the justice of the case to dismiss the case or to disqualify her directly. so we're seeing that the judge actually had a real problem with her but saying at the end of the day it doesn't matter. it doesn't affect the outcome of this trial or due process rights. he has more of a problem with her personally than leaving her on the case. >> martha: the answer to my prior question about, you know, why leave her on the case? does he make the argument for why she must stay with regard to justice? >> well, he goes through the law in georgia with regard to disqualification of prosecutors.

it is not particularly robust when we get to the idea of the implied conflict or in talking about the forensic conflict that has been raised. the judge doesn't have a lot of tools to use to give him that discretion. there is a great presumption given to prosecutors who are elected they have the rights to make prosecutorial decisions. the judge's hands are tied on that based on the law. >> martha: thank you. please stick around and we have a great group of guests and more people joining us as we go through the breaking news this morning. judge mcafee has made his decision and leaving it up to fani willis saying she can stay on this case with her team and if she stays, then nathan wade must go. we'll be right back with more on "america's newsroom." hello, ghostbusters. it's doug... ...of doug and limu. we help people customize and save hundreds on car insurance with liberty mutual. anyway, we got a bit of a situation here. uh-huh. uh-huh.

mm-hmm. sure, i can hold. only pay for what you need. ♪(sung) liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪ ghostbusters: frozen empire. in theaters march 22. choice hotels is a family of brands with a hotel for any traveler you want to be. like #1 chef dad, cookin' up a free, hot breakfast for the entire family at a comfort hotel. mom made this. umm, i... added the garnish. stay twice and get a free night when you book direct. (ella) fashion moves fast. (jen) so we partner with verizon to take our operations to the next level. (marquis) with a custom private 5g network. (ella) we get more control of production, efficiencies, and greater agility. (jen) that's enterprise intelligence. (vo) it's your vision, it's your verizon.

somebody would ask her something and she would just walk right past them. she didn't know they were talking to her. i just could not hear. i was hesitant to get the hearing aids because of my short hair. but nobody even sees them. our nearly invisible hearing aids are just one reason we've been the brand leader

for over 75 years. when i finally could hear for the first time, i could hear everything. call miracle-ear at 1-800-234-7090 and schedule your free hearing evaluation today.

-unnecessary action hero ... the nemesis. -it appears that despite my sinister efforts, employees are still managing their own hr and payroll. why would you think mere humans deserve to do their own payroll? because their livelihoods depend on it? because they have bills to pay? hear me now, paycom! return the world of hr and payroll to its rightful place of chaos or face a tsunami of unnecessary the likes of which you have never seen! this is our future, ma. godaddy airo. creates a logo, website, even social posts... in minutes! -how? -a.i. (impressed) ay i like it! who wants to come see the future?! get your business online in minutes with godaddy airo

>> bill: the news of the morning. full ton count owe judge said he would give a decision within two weeks. he spoke with a local tv station this week saying friday is day. now we have the answer. he is giving fani willis the option to either stay or go. if she stays, nathan wade will not be with her. if she goes, they are both off the case here. our team is still lined up here trying to analyze this and go through the decision and there is still more information coming in about this. andrew here in new york. let's go -- can we call for number three. a big part of the case, the trips they took.

many trips and they testified they paid each other in cash and everything was on the up and up. you see an the luxe travel. what did the judge determine about these trips together? >> the judge actually goes through and makes some findings about the trips and various costs of the trips. here on page seven he says such a reimbursement practice may be unusual and lack of any documentation corroborating understandably concerning. yet the testimony with stood direct contradiction and corroborated by other evidence and not to incredible as to be inherently unbelievable. the judge is critical of it but it wasn't enough to create an actual conflict. the judge also says that it is a matter of a few hundred dollars that essentially willis would have benefited from in the course of these various trips with the money going back and forth. not particularly persuaded by it but recognizes there was a lot of back and forth there.

>> martha: we all remember those discussions about the flights of wine tasting, the caviar, the grey goose vodka because she doesn't like wine. a lot of people thought was sort of a strange departure for her to be elaborating on in this environment. but as you point out, they went through painstakingly this is how much i paid him back, this is how much the trip cost, and in the end, according to what they testified. sounds like the judge is going along with they are testimony here. then it was corroborated by her dad and has a lot of cash in her house. >> it wasn't enough for that to be the actual conflict. the judge had to go through an effort to keep her on the case. the facts didn't matter enough in order to disqualify her and he is saying the same thing about the actual romantic relationship. a romantic relationship between prosecutors isn't inherently a

conflict of interest but must be wrapped into an improper benefit or purpose. >> martha: the romantic relationship is irrelevant if there is not a financial gain being made by it. because that's the state's money. that's the relevant point. >> bill: she pulls nathan wade an attorney schooled in a different kind of law than this. the allegation was he was giving her romantic partner business on a high profile case. >> she has discredited herself through this. it is not enough to kick her off the case but in the eyes of the public, the faith in the impartiality of their prosecution is a real problem at this point. the judge doesn't pull many punches in that regard, either. he calls her out for conduct that falls below the expectations of a prosecutor. he just doesn't go so far and he is saying his hands are a bit tied based on the precedent and law in georgia that his hands are tied to actually take such a

dramatic step. it would be a dramatic step to pull off an entire d.a.'s office from a prosecution of a big case. it doesn't happen often. >> bill: are you surprised by this? what did you think? >> i'm a bit disappointed by it. the judge is turning his head to a few major issues. not only is it the money, not only is it the relationship and the lies that seem to have occurred in court. it is also improper speech that was given to that congregation in january. it is the nature of their overall demeanor in the courtroom. i think as a judge you can say at a certain point this has interfered with the confidence we have in the prosecution that takes place. >> bill: we were talking during the commercial, martha, about the speech given inside the church that happened a couple months back i believe. i don't remember the exact date. we have a clip of that. since the trump team mentioned it and the judge mentioned it, this is how that went. don't have it, okay. my apologies.

i thought it was ready to go. what she said apparently is that isn't it them, using her words, playing the race card when they constantly think i need someone from some other jurisdiction and some other state to tell me how to do the job i've been doing for almost 30 years. she said more than that but the judge was keen on pointing that out. we got it? apologies, roll it now. >> [poor audio] them playing the race card when they constantly think i need someone from another jurisdiction in some other state to tell me how to do a job i've been doing almost 30 years. >> bill: how did the judge react to that? called it legally improper. that's what he said about it. it wasn't enough to disqualify her. >> bill: sta