The Department of Justice has turned its attention to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, amid allegations of financial mismanagement and larger implications of her high-profile investigative efforts against former President Donald Trump. The DOJ has scrutinized Willis over her handling of federal grant funds following whistleblower allegations and subsequent claims of financial inconsistencies. The inquiry intersects with Willis’s high-profile role in leading the investigation into former President Donald Trump’s actions during the Georgia election in 2020.
Willis’s office, which has gained national attention for its investigation into Trump’s election interference, is under the microscope for potentially misusing a $488,000 grant designated for gang prevention efforts in Fulton County. The DOJ’s probe was sparked by whistleblower Amanda Timpson, who alleges she was fired after voicing concerns in 2021 that funds were being allocated for purposes unrelated to the grant’s intentions.
Timpson’s accusations led to a broader review by the DOJ, which, according to a report from the Washington Free Beacon, found “inconsistencies” in how the grant money was reported by Fulton County, specifically relating to funds purportedly directed to the Offender Alumni Association, a claim the charity disputes.
A spokesperson for the DOJ stated, “During our review of the award to respond to this inquiry, we have noticed some inconsistencies in what Fulton County has reported … and we are working with them to update their reporting accordingly.”
The House Judiciary Committee, led by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), has also taken an interest in Willis’s use of federal funds. The committee has gone so far as to threaten Willis with contempt of Congress for inadequate responses to inquiries about the grant.
Willis has defended her office’s conduct, arguing in a letter to the committee that the inquiry serves to “harass” her and interfere with ongoing prosecutions, including that of Trump. She described Timpson as a disgruntled former employee with a history of unsuccessful lawsuits against her office, dismissing the whistleblower’s claims as “erroneous.”
Despite the controversies, Willis has maintained that her office has cooperated closely with the DOJ regarding the grant. Trump, for his part, has pleaded not guilty to all charges related to election interference, accusing Willis of political bias. His defense, echoed by his supporters, frames the legal challenges he faces as politically motivated, a narrative that has intensified the backlash of Willis’s actions and decision-making.
On Tuesday, attorneys for Trump requested that a district appeals court reconsider an earlier decision by Judge Scott McAfee allowing Willis to remain in charge of the case if she dismissed Nathan Wade, the prosecutor with whom she carried on a private personal relationship that likely began before he was hired to join the case. The president’s attorneys have pointed to a rambling speech she gave in January as proof that her politicization of the case goes well beyond the nepotism of hiring Wade.
“There is simply no trial court error to be found in the decision to deny disqualification,” Willis wrote in a filing on Monday, adding her speech was “too vague, brief and limited in scope” to warrant disqualification.
“Days of evidence and testimony failed to disclose anything like a calculated pre-trial plan designed to prejudice the defendants or secure their convictions,” the district attorney added. “The applicants have not identified any public statement injecting the District Attorney’s personal belief as to the defendants’ guilt or appealing to the public weighing of evidence.”
An appeals court has until the middle of May to consider whether to overturn Judge McAfee’s original decision.