It’s been nearly two months since Nathan Wade resigned from his post as special prosecutor in the Fulton County District Attorney’s office. Superior Court Judge Scott McAffee ruled at the time that either Wade or District Attorney Fani Willis had to recuse themself from the election interference case against Donald Trump and his co-defendants in Georgia.
Within hours, Wade submitted his letter of resignation and largely stayed out of the spotlight – until now. Over the weekend, Wade gave his first interview since the judge’s decision to ABC News’ Linsey Davis.
It was an interesting move because he had reportedly agreed to sit down with Kristen Welker of NBC weeks ago but ended up bailing on her and embarrassing the network. So, now he showed up on the ABC airwaves where he was asked precisely zero difficult questions. I mean, zero.
Here is exhibit A:
DAVIS: So you didn’t realize when you took the case your life was really going to be under a microscope?
WADE: I did not realize that my life would be in danger. The microscope, I don’t have a problem with. The truth is, if the worst that you could find was the fact that I had a relationship with someone or that I happened to be going through a divorce, that’s okay. That’s, that’s okay. I have nothing to hide…
Now, a responsible journalist would follow up with:
Well, that wasn’t the worst that we found. What we actually found was that you perjured yourself – both in your divorce case and in this case, where the judge found that you told a story that smacked with the ‘odor of mendacity,’ where he was obviously deeply distressed at your ethical choices.
And by the way, why did you do that? Why did you say under oath in your divorce proceedings that you were not having an extramarital affair when you clearly were? Was that not an inappropriate ethical lapse?
Why did you testify in your affidavit that Fani Wilis paid cash for everything when that seems to be patently untrue? Why, sir, did you go over to her house from 12am to 4am and then try to tell the court that it was because there was a Porsche dealership nearby?
Those are some things that you might feel some shame about. It’s not just your extramarital affair that you claimed began while you were separated, but you were still with your wife when it was underway.
So, those are some of the things an interested reporter, somebody who is open-minded to actual facts might have asked of Nathan Wade. But it didn’t happen.
Instead, Davis asked him about criticism from outlets like The Washington Post that this was reckless, that they imperiled a very important case and that is why the left is mad at Nathan Wade. Here’s what he said:
DAVIS: Do you think that you’ve done any kind of damage to this case?
WADE: None at all.
DAVIS: Even the public perception of it?
WADE: There again, this takes me back to the initial statement that I made. My private life became the focal point of the case and my private life has nothing to do with the merits of that prosecution…
And then there was this:
WADE: Workplace romances are as American as apple pie. It happens to everyone. But it happened to the two of us.
DAVIS: Do you regret it?
WADE: [pause] I regret that that private matter became the focal point of this very important prosecution. This is a very important case. I hate that my personal life has begun to overshadow the true issues in the case…
As American as apple pie? It’s unbelievable.
Why this became an issue is not because you and Fani Willis found love while prosecuting Trump. It is the fact that you were hired by your boss. Fani Willis was in charge. She brought you in. She rubber stamped your invoices. She paid you more than she paid the other two special prosecutors who are brought in despite you not having the same qualifications to try a massive RICO case against a former president of the United States. And then you took her all over the world on the taxpayer dollar, thus creating an incentive for the two of you to indict the case – because the romance was happening before the indictment came down – and then to keep the case going.
None of this was pressed in the interview by someone who is supposed to be a member of the press corps. It is infuriating to watch a person in the media completely fall down on the job and not ask any difficult questions. It makes my skin crawl.
She should have gone in there with his interrogatory and she should have said:
You lied under oath. This is a sworn document. You are an officer of the court. You lied when asked for any receipts or any documents whatsoever that might show any travel with a woman other than your wife during a set period of dates. It didn’t have to be while you were happily married. It was any time prior to the divorce. That would have included periods of separation. In fact, they were specific on that. The excuse on the stand of ‘Well, we were separated’ doesn’t fly because you were required to say what you had done during that period with a woman other than your wife.
You lied and you said no expenses had been paid, that no trips had been taken, that there was no time between you and a woman who was not your wife. That’s what you said under oath. And only when that became an issue in the second proceeding that you had against Trump, did you go back to your sworn interrogatory and amend your answer to assert the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
But when asked about it on the stand, you tried to say, ‘Oh, that is not the privilege I was trying to raise. I was trying to raise a privacy privilege.’ That is made up, sir. Why did you do that? Didn’t you violate your duty of candor to the court and to your constituency?
It is not that hard. Use your brain. Do your research. If anybody else gets a shot at Nathan Wade, I just wrote your questions for you. This is why we never make progress and people like this get away with it.
You can check out Megyn’s full analysis by tuning in to episode 783 on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you like to listen. And don’t forget that you can catch The Megyn Kelly Show live on SiriusXM’s Triumph (channel 111) weekdays from 12pm to 2pm ET.