So says the local Fox affiliate in Atlanta, which got a look at the recently unsealed Wade v Wade divorce file. With the apparent exception of the bank records and travel receipts already released to the public, nothing else directly relates to Fani Willis or her alleged romantic relationship with Nathan Wade.

Directly, that is:

The recently unsealed records pertaining to the divorce of Fulton County Special Prosecutor Nathan Wade do not provide evidence of an “improper, clandestine” relationship with his superior, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. …

Cobb County Superior Court Judge Henry Thompson ordered the unsealing of these records on Monday. However, the extensive documents, spanning hundreds of pages, make no mention of Willis or any other potential romantic interest.

The file isn’t entirely void of data on this issue, however. Jocelyn Wade alleges in her response to Wade’s divorce action that her husband was unfaithful, and demanded to know more about his ‘partners.’ Willis’ name doesn’t get mentioned, but the issue clearly does:

In her counterclaim submitted on Nov. 30, 2021, a comprehensive list of interrogatories was included. These questions covered financial matters related to Nathan Wade, along with personal aspects, including sexual partners and casual meetings with women other than his wife during their marriage and separation; social media and dating website activities; and inquiries about alcohol and drug usage.

Nearly two years later, Mrs. Wade filed a new discovery motion that made the point more specific. That’s when Wade coughed up the bank records and travel receipts with Willis’ name on them:

In September 2023, Joycelyn Wade filed a motion to reopen discovery, alleging that Nathan Wade, while appointed as a special prosecutor in the Trump case, was leading a lavish lifestyle, spending substantial amounts of money, leaving her with minimal financial support. In December 2023, Nathan Wade reportedly produced some outstanding discovery responses, revealing credit card statements indicating non-work-related trips with Willis.

Those records appear to reveal an “improper, clandestine” relationship between Willis and her contracted subordinate Wade, but of course, we’ve already seen those. (Techno Fog has screen caps.)  They also demonstrate that Willis personally benefited in real terms from the funds she directed as DA to Wade, her subordinate. Mrs. Wade only got those documents a few weeks ago, and one assumes her attorneys realized their political and legal import and passed them along to Michael Roman’s attorneys. Roman’s team immediately filed the motion to disqualify Willis and Wade from the entire RICO case on the basis of misconduct.

Again, we knew that much already. The divorce file itself will not provide any more clarity on these issues. However, what has emerged already was enough for Judge Scott McAfee to demand answers from Willis and Wade, due a week from Friday in writing, about their relationship and the use of public funds for private benefit.

So rather than having the unsealed records be Fani-Mas, that may come on February 15, when McAfee holds a hearing after receiving the affidavits from all sides on the 2nd. The appearance of unethical behavior may force McAfee to grant the disqualification motion, and if it does, it puts the case in real jeopardy. Media outlets are running arguments that it doesn’t affect the actual indictment, but former assistant district attorney Philip Holloway says it might be too much for anyone else to take up:

While appearing on Fox News’ America’s Newsroom, Holloway, a former assistant district attorney, spoke about the ongoing scandal that Willis is facing after being accused of having a relationship with a special prosecutor on the case against the former president.

“It would be a question, if she gets recused, then her whole office has to be recused. If she’s got a conflict of interest, everybody who works for her has that same conflict of interest,” Holloway said. “So the prosecuting attorney’s counsel here in Georgia or the attorney general’s office may have to sort out who in the state of Georgia, if anyone, wants this.”

“If they can find somebody who does even want it, think about how much it’s going to take for them to get up to speed because Willis and the team that she has, has been working on this for two or three years now, so somebody else would have to come in and get up to speed, but it has to be somebody that wants it,” Holloway added.

Some of the charges within the indictment could stand on their own. But the application of state RICO laws to an enterprise with no material-gain motivation has always been novel to the point of possible absurdity, especially in its reliance on political arguments made in public. Will a prosecutor in Georgia really want to adopt Willis’ novelties? That’s the real question.

Note: I fixed an error I made in pasting the excerpt.