The disclosure of data that appears to show a torrid telephone and text correspondence between District Attorney Fani Willis and her special prosecutor, Nathan Wade, makes it ever more logical for the pair to recuse themselves from the Trump prosecution — or be removed. If the records are right, both the district attorney and the prosecutor could face not only disqualification, but charges of perjury. How could they stay on the case?

Few are better placed to answer that question than a lawyer, Harvey Silverglate, who represents one of the defendants, John Eastman, an erstwhile attorney for President Trump. Mr. Silverglate predicts that Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade are not long for the case, and expresses the hope that a fresh team, appointed by a “higher authority,” could bring a “new set of eyes” and “procure a new and simpler conspiracy indictment.”

That’s good lawyering, in our view. Ms. Willis’ indiscretions — and, possibly, her dishonesty — offer an opportunity to think this prosecution through down to the studs. Mr. Silverglate reckons that eschewing Georgia’s version of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act in favor of the simpler conspiracy charge would reduce the “trial time from some 18 months to about 3 weeks” and cut down on millions in expenses.

Ms. Willis has a special fondness for RICO, on which more below. In addition to the charging of Mr. Trump and 18 others, she has used the statute against public school teachers and now, the rapper Young Thug and his camarilla. Created at the federal level to fight the mob, RICO has been stretched beyond recognition. Mr. Silverglate quips that with RICO, “everyone including the butler gets convicted.”

We have long called RICO a racket and decried its vagueness. After Ms. Willis handed up charges, we wrote that “one of the issues with RICO is the way its penalties can be marshaled or multiplied to force suspects or persons accused into settling.” Meaning, it is rife for abuse. Even at that early juncture, it appeared that the “entire case seems to hang on RICO.” Now, if Ms. Willis falls, her RICO regime could tumble as well.

If the relationship between Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade predated her hiring of him, a disconcerting possibility comes into focus. Did they together conspire to bring a RICO case of bewildering complexity and a large number of defendants to create more work for Mr. Wade — lawyers bill by the hour — and in turn more money for both of them? For a while, they were taking vacations together and tossing around what, for most of us, is a lot of lucre.

In any event, the latest disclosures of evidence from Mr. Wade’s phone have all eyes now focused on yet another hearing that the jurist reviewing this scandal, Scott McAfee, has scheduled for March 1. That hearing will, our A.R. Hoffman reports,  address the question of whether Mr. Wade and Ms. Willis should be disqualified. Last week, two sessions in open court were devoted to the same issue. 

To us the question is as clear as the law in the state of Georgia. The codes mandate that it is the “policy of Fulton County government” that officers of the court like Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade are “in fact and in appearance, independent and impartial in the performance of their official duties.” Even the appearance of a conflict of interest is forbidden by the rules. The pair passed that Rubicon long ago. Georgia would do well to leave RICO behind with them.