We're awaiting a decision from Fulton County DA Fawnee Willis following a judge's ultimatum in the Trump election interference case. Superior Court Judge Scott McCaffee ruled that Willis must cut ties with Special Prosecutor Nathan Wade or step aside herself. Big decision. The Georgia judge is calling Willis and Wade's conduct a tremendous lapse of judgment. But he says their series of bad choices do not constitute a direct or actual conflict of interest. And while Willis may end staying on Trump's case, Willis is still under investigation by a Georgia Senate committee, and what they find could impact the prosecution of former President Trump. Let's bring in Fox News contributor and constitutional law expert, Jonathan Turley. Professor Turley, I think the immediate question becomes, are we going to see an interlocutory appeal from the Trump team? They said they're using every avenue at their discretion. I know that typically comes following a case, but Judge McAfee could allow that appeal before the It is totally up to him, which would mean delay and perhaps no case before November.

That is a distinct possibility, Kaylee. Either side could try to take that relatively rare step to seek a pallet review. The decision by the court has many strong aspects to it, but the conclusion seems disconnected in that he's disqualifying Wade but allowing Willis to continue. Many people people have said, Well, it's a very Solomon decision of splitting the baby. The difference is that King Solomon didn't actually split the baby. The baby survived. This is not that verdict. That is, in this case, you have Willis, who has consistently put her own interests ahead of the case, ahead of her office, and frankly, the interests of the people of Fulton County. I mean, many aspects of this decision really are scathing. He goes after Willis for playing the race card, as he refers to it in her speech remarks before the church. He shows that they both use horrendous judgment, but he only disqualifies one of the two.

To underscore your point, we want to put up some of the language from the indictment for you. We have this loaded in because the conclusion, to your point, doesn't seem to match some of the language we see. He talks about an odor of mendacity remains, pretty tough language, the tremendous lapse of judgment, the unprofessional manner of the DA's testimony, significant appearance of impropriety that infects the current structure of the prosecution team. There is a taint to this case, and You've got to wonder what happens if the Senate, the Georgia Senate, gets the 2,000 calls and 12,000 interactions, what happens?

Well, that is really why weeks ago, Willa should have removed herself if she was fulfilling her oath. I think that this is really unprofessional that she has put her own interest ahead of that of the case. What's fascinating is that the court indicates that it did not believe Wade. Most of us felt that he seemed to have committed perjury that hasn't been charged, but it was hard to reconcile his statements given to an earlier court about his sexual relationship during his divorce proceedings and his denial of any relationship before he was hired. That stands contradicted by witnesses, a stance contradicted by some of the evidence, like the phone records. The judge doesn't suggest that he rehabilitated himself. Instead That he disqualifies. But Willis adopted, essentially, that testimony. They testified in tandem. She supported it. So if he was lying, so was she. Now, keep in mind, they're prosecuting people for making false statements in this case. They're prosecuting people for filing false statements with courts. How on earth you continue with that cloud over your head? I just don't know.

Yeah, he refers to mendacity. And to your point, they're prosecuting people for mendacity. Really interesting. Professor Turley, thank you. Thank you, Kaylee. Emily, so I want to underscore, why did the judge rule this way? I want to pull this up with regard to the evidence because we all saw the evidence, we heard the evidence, we heard Robin Yerty, and he says this, Neither side was able to conclusively establish by a preponderance of the evidence when the relationship evolved into a romantic one. So they don't know the timing of it, he said. And then such a reimbursement practice, because remember, Willis said, I reimbursed verse with cash. While he said it may be unusual in the lack of any documentary corroboration is concerning, the testimony withstood contradiction and was corroborated by other evidence. But what happens to Paul Morrow's point when we find out what is in those text messages from 2021?

Right. So let me respond in the opposite order to that, which is so we know that the Georgia Senate investigation is happening, right? So essentially, what we might learn from the Georgia Senate investigation is, apparently, concrete evidence, let's say, concrete evidence of when the relationship started. Apparently, this testimony wasn't enough. Also, the Georgia governor and the Georgia attorney general both have power to appoint special prosecutors to essentially investigate more. What It would happen if we learned that? Not only would the judge potentially here be embarrassed, but Fannie Willis might then be proven pejoreous and also unfit, frankly, to serve her duty. But I want to go back to this decision because the judge made this point, Whether or not we agree with it? He said the standard, the bar, while it's a preponderance of the evidence, the standard to prove actual conflict of interest for a prosecutor is high. He went through case law, he went through Georgia precedence, and he said, Here, defendants are arguing it's a prima facie case, meaning on its face, guys, they were in a romantic relationship, improper motivation, unjust financial enrichment. That's what they were arguing that. Just on its face, it was a conflict.

He said they haven't proven to his standard, to the legally sufficient standard, that an actual conflict occurred. And so take that what you will. But I think at the end of the day, what we're going to learn will prove to have a negative effect on this. It will prove to dilute, unfortunately, the caliber of this decision because most everyone watching is like, What are you talking about? Get him out of here. That whole case appears tainted.

Tommy, I saw you nodding when I was talking about the Georgia legislature. I want to show our viewers what exactly we will learn because this is 2021. So they insist the relationship began after Nathan Wade's appointment. But there are 12,000 contacts. 10,000 of them are text. I don't contact my husband that much, and I love my husband.

Yeah, no, I agree with you, and nor do I. I also love my husband. Listen, this This whole thing here, I think, is a big win for team Trump, maybe if not legally, at least in the court of public opinion. I think that's their biggest battle with Donald Trump and his campaign is the court of public opinion. I think people are sitting back and looking at this and looking at this cirque de soleil of the legal process, and they're thinking, Boy, this all seems really fishy, and I might not know all the legal ins and outs of this, and I might think that the judge is crazy. But when you look at it from just the average American, they're thinking, They've sure done a lot to go after this man, and all these people that are going after him in the pursuit of democracy seem to not care at all about democracy. And this, Fannie Willis is so reckless and so flagrant. If your whole motivation is to go after Trump for the sake of democracy, and then you're taking these lavish vacations and you're saying you're paying for him in cash, and you've got all these text messages, I mean, at least tighten it up and clean it up a little bit.

But she thought, This will never come back to me. And that, to me, is just such a slap in the face to the people of Fulton County, the people of America.

What a joke. Now, the judge actually addressed the cash payments issue in that decision today, and I found that very interesting because anyone that was listening to that knows anything about Venmo and Zell would know that it did not seem to be the truth. But the defense was not able to prove that in the judge's mind. I thought that first was very interesting. Then also the fact that this judge might have a political issue here. He was at the Rotary Club last night campaigning. He's got to get himself to go back into the good graces of the electric, and I think that might have affected that decision a little bit.

Patrick, a win for Fannie Willis. There's no doubt about that, but perhaps a loss for Democrats who are trying to wage these legal cases, and this just stinks.

Yeah, she won the battle, but might be losing the war. Yeah, I agree with the judge. It was poor judgment. But it doesn't change the fact that it's a distraction because really the underlying case is a potential violation of Georgia law with a recorded phone call that may or may not have tampered with democracy after that 2020 election.

And a case that may or may not happen prior to November. We will see. We are watching. We will keep you up to date if we hear exactly what the DA intends to do next.

Hey, everyone. I'm Emily Campanio. Catch me and my co-host, Harris Faulkner and Kaylee McEnneney on Outnumbered Every Weekday at 12:00 PM Eastern, or set your DVR. Also, don't forget to subscribe to the Fox News YouTube page for daily highlights.