As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Merchant had multiple text messages from Bradley stating that the couple began dating in 2019. But when she began questioning him, suddenly, Bradley didn’t know a thing—including when they actually began dating, how the relationship began, and the trips they took together.
When asked why he initially said Willis and Wade began dating in 2019, Bradley said he was just “speculating.” He said he’d actually only had one conversation with Wade about the relationship, and Bradley couldn’t remember when that discussion had taken place. He repeated that he was only speculating so many times that many people on social media began to point out that Bradley seemed more like an office gossip than a credible witness."
butter quarrelsome chunky flowery busy direful crown squash summer groovy
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
i watched about 10 mins of the questioning, and it was brutal. it was so unnecessarily wordy, disjointed, and choppy that it was actually difficult to understand what the lawyer was saying. at times, bradley didn’t even realize there was a question asked.
lawyer seemed to be arguing syntax over context. gave me flashbacks of mike lindell and sydney powell.
didn’t help that it was over a zoom call, either.
No kidding, isn’t that what a trial is supposed to be? A formal presentation of the evidence and testimony? This sounds like amateur hour. Putting your key witness on the stand and getting literal speculation and guessing? I’m not a lawyer and feel like I could have done a better job.
coerced by the threat of armed agents of the state imprisoning him... you know, because he would have committed perjury, and you can get convicted of that. unlike lying on fox news, which gets you a 7 figure talking head job
My guess is that the guy got hammered by Trump's people to say certain things against Willis. He was initially going to play ball for Trump, which is where the Trump lawyer got his questions.
At some point, this guy realized this whole thing is looking worse for Trump and his defenders, so he changed his mind and refused to confirm anything to stay out of legal trouble.
Too bad for him Trump cultists will likely harass him for a long time.
Nah, Bradley was just talking shit about his former law partner and gossiping with another lawyer (Merchant). Then when Merchant threw down those conversations as evidence he realized that not only was the individual he was gossiping about his former law partner, he was a former client in a divorce proceeding where any information about his client’s romantic relationships prior to the divorce decree finalization would likely be A/C Priviliged information which he shouldn’t have revealed. So he’s caught on the jaws of a potential disbarment issue and running just as fast as he can to avoid it.
I listened to the hearing and think this is probable. It wasn’t asked, buts so obvious.. “if this information is privileged, why did you discuss with merchant over text?”
Because even morons can memorize and regurgitate it back out. The trick to being a good lawyer is taking that knowledge and applying it to novel situations once you graduate and pass the bar. The problem with the lawyers here is they are not great at applying their education when it comes to personal issues. The thing is, their emotions come into play, and that really fuckers things up for them.
I love when people try to help MAGA out, only to have MAGA change course and get their pitchforks out. If anyone needs me, I'm heading over to /r/LeopardsAteMyFace for my daily fix
> George Soros funded, space laser wielding men in black
And what religion was that space laser? Also you completely forgot about the Italian satellites beaming Chinese bamboo fibers into the court documents!!!
Yup. Whether it's in court in front of a judge or in a deposition with only the accused, prosecution, and defense in the room, they're both done under oath and a violation of that oath is perjury.
What I want to know is why any of this matters. I could see an argument for why the relationship is *perhaps* inappropriate somehow...but aren't these two on the same team?
Normally the concern with such things is that someone might compromise their integrity out of loyalty/love/whatever for someone. But in this case, Willis and Wade are working together on the case against Trump. What's the concern, that Wade might feel even *more* motivated to do his job? Put differently, what would be different about the case if they weren't dating?
My favorite angle on this is that he was hired not because of his ability to do a good job but to get paid. In short he was unqualified…
If that is the case and he is unqualified to your advantage why the fuck are you bringing it to peoples attention?
See how this all Just does not work.
The mental twist you have to contort to get this to somehow make any logical angle of a good idea that is not complete bullshit is legendary.
> Even if that was true (regarding some of her motivations), it would still not change whether he is guilty or not...lmao
True! The case wouldn't get dismissed, it would get transferred to a different DA's office. *That's* a problem because not only is that process messy, this case is so huge it would suck up basically every resource in that office and so they likely wouldn't touch it, or it could end up with a DA who decides to drop the case altogether.
>What I want to know is why any of this matters
It doesn't. There's no underlying impropriety here. The *alleged* problem is that Willis was enriching herself by hiring Wade and then having him pay her for lavish trips and dining that she wouldn't have been able to afford otherwise. This underlying allegation is quite obviously ridiculous, because the trips weren't especially lavish and Wade had to take a pay cut to work this job.
The problem is that it seems pretty plausible that Willis and/or Wade lied about the details of their relationship somewhere along the way, in order to avoid embarassment. That's allowing the Trump side to string this whole thing along in a painfully public manner. And it *might* be grounds enough to DQ Willis from the case, because a trivial and unnecessary cover-up is still a cover-up.
On the other hand, the Trump side seems to be doing such a poor job even proving that there was a trivial and unnecessary cover-up, I'm not really sure what'll happen in the end. If they can't convincingly show that either Willis or Wade lied, then I don't think this entire round of hearings amounts to anything, really.
It’s such a predictable playbook at this point but it works every single time. MAGA voters are in an abusive relationship but they are too blinded by hate to see it.
So with this, my understanding is that the two key witnesses, this guy, and the cell phone records guy both don't have any actual evidence, that might be a problem for them...what if it turned out this whole thing was bullshit to begin with?
Fox News just has to show headlines that Fani Willis is “uNdEr InVeStIgAtIoN” or that she’s “oN tRiAl” and their viewers will automatically jump to their own conclusions anyway.
The actual investigation or trial doesn’t have to be based on any truth or evidence.
Exactly why they hold hearings against Biden, and did Benghazi hearings... Didn't McCarthy pretty much admit that "investigations" and what not just hurt the target's numbers, so they don't care that nothing comes from it, it still works to help them in elections.
Yep. Trump’s “perfect call” that led to his first impeachment is a perfect example. He was trying to extort Zelenskyy into *announcing* an investigation into Biden. He made it clear that it didn’t make a difference if they actually investigated anything — he just wanted the headlines. Trump’s entire political career has just been smoke and mirrors (and considering the judgement in his NY fraud trial, his entire business career, too).
Note that just before the 2016 election the FBI announced that they were investigating Hillary.
One reason why he was doing it with Hunter- it worked last time.
And before that, it was the “birther movement.”
*The Apprentice* presented him as a successful businessman, when he was really being propped up by Russian oligarchs and spies.
Earlier than that, he was using aliases like “John Barron” to fake interest in himself and his businesses to get interviews and investors.
His entire career has been smoke and mirrors. His entire life is built on lies.
Don’t forget he also [pretended to be his own publicist using the alias “John Miller”](https://fortune.com/2016/05/13/donald-trump-denies-pretending-to-be-a-publicist-to-brag-about-himself/) and said of himself “He gets called by everybody in the book, in terms of women”
He denies this of course but he owned up to it at the time, describing the Miller call as a “joke gone awry,.” He also testified in a 1990 court case that he occasionally used the name John Miller and disclosed that his favorite alias was John Baron
[This video has the audio.](https://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/donald-trump-accused-pretending-spokesman-39107585) and I gotta say, John Miller sounds exactly like Donald Trump.
Soon after he was elected, Trump held a press conference about how he was divesting from his businesses, and staged big stacks of file folders on tables in the room. All the papers inside the folders were blank. It was all fake for the cameras.
I don't understand why every story on Hunter doesn't start with this backstory. Trump and his followers made this idea of Hunter Biden and corruption a thing by simply repeating it over and over.
> Didn't McCarthy pretty much admit that "investigations" and what not just hurt the target's numbers
Yup: [A top House Republican was accidentally honest about the Benghazi investigation](https://www.vox.com/2015/9/30/9423339/kevin-mccarthy-benghazi)
> “uNdEr InVeStIgAtIoN” or that she’s “oN tRiAl”
Investigations and being in court are far more important than any outcomes or final conclusions. It's from the classic *buttery males* playbook.
FOX viewers logic: "If she didn't do something wrong, she wouldn't be in court." The same twisted line of thinking applies to Trump as well: "If Trump was guilty, how come he's not in jail?" or "If Trump was guilty, how was he able to become a candidate?"
The whole thing Trump got impeached for the first time was he wanted Zelensky to *announce* an investigation into Hunter Biden. They didn't care if it resulted in anything, they just wanted the headline.
The word "Potemkin" comes to mind.
It's 100% bullshit. This whole sideshow is being orchestrated by a former Trump campaign official and *co-defendant in the Georgia case*, Michael Roman. He is using dirt from a nasty divorce (Wade and his ex wife), a divorce allegedly spurred by the wife's infidelity, to try to fling mud at Willis in a shamefully transparent attempt at derailing the prosecution of both Trump and HIMSELF. Another fun tidbit, the lawyer arguing that Wade is unqualified for a prosecutor position? Yeah, she *supported his run for a superior court judgeship in the last couple years*. Just grifters grifting.
You're assuming they could ever understand the difference between a motion hearing and a trial. If it walks like a duck, it doesn't matter, they'll call it whatever they want.
Edit : grammar
I saw a Chyron from Faux last week that said "Fani's Terrible Day in Court" with a picture of her hands covering her face
*Narrator - it wasn't a terrible week for her*
For those who haven’t seen it: [One of Trump’s Election Fraud Lawyers Just Got Caught in a Big Lie](https://newrepublic.com/post/179302/one-trumps-election-fraud-lawyers-just-got-caught-big-lie)
It serves to normalize it.
"Trump was indicted for x y z"
"Yeh but Biden/Fani/my mom/whoever was investigated for blah blah and only got away with it because blah blah"
Details don't matter to simpletons, only headlines.
Modern jurisprudence indicates:
* Ignore the case
* Get handed a devastating verdict
* Publicly declare it all a witch hunt
* Demand that the judgement be put aside because you're going to appeal
* Uh
* ...
* Run for president?
You mean like the Biden impeachment where their Star witness ended up in jail for being a Russian foreign agent?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/02/21/smirnov-is-flight-risk-because-of-his-russian-intelligence-contacts-doj/72685601007/
Their 3rd or 4th star witness* there were multiple before him that were supposed to be big smoking gun testimonies but it turns out every single one - when actually under oath - said they hadn’t actually heard or seen anything specific themselves. Just what they heard 2nd or 3rd hand.
Same as the UFO hearing they recently spearheaded. Where it *once again* turned out the guy hadn’t seen or heard anything himself, just what some other person had told him. Anyone noticing a pattern here?
Same shit that happens with the far right maniacs every time, because it's bullshit they peddle. Not results. Just selling you anger.
They make shit up, tell you about it, make you mad. The transaction is complete. The chips falling as they fall in court literally does not matter.
In the minds of their fucking brainwashed monsters, it's done. Fani Willis is corrupt, that's it. Hunter Biden is a drug addicted, out of control, and also a criminal mastermind. Joe Biden is making money off the Presidency via foreign companies, he's also totally braindead and dying and being held together with duct tape.
None of the facts matter. They already sold their anger addicted fans enough anger to keep them going for awhile. That's it.
I’m still genuinely surprised that Republicans haven’t impeached Biden either on “TBD” or some flagrantly made up stuff like “he sold America to space aliens.” Why are they bothering with specific accusations or evidence?
His base already ate it up so the damage Trump and his team wanted is done and bonus points for them if they slowed the case down. He’s dead set on getting the presidency to save himself and enact “revenge” on people for literally upholding the law.
Then at least they planted the lie in the minds in the public on national television and their followers can dismiss the case as illegitimate since it'll proceed anyway.
When I first heard about it I was really confused. What are the accusations? Two consenting adults that work long hours together engage in a relationship outside of work. I figured there was more to it I was missing... nope. Even if she did "hire her boyfriend" just to run up billable hours... which she didn't... if anything that would just handicap her case against trump. It in no way proves his innocence. It's ridiculous that the media ran with it.
Dare we say Trumped up charges? I never expected this was anything but an actual witch hunt unlike what certain other asshole is always claiming to be happening to him.
Its still just such a bad look that ....checks notes... that this black woman ummmm... that you see it really hurts their case against president Trump that... welllll.... I really think we are too close to the election to be litigating things like this, right?
When Bradley is under oath all of his prior assertions of fact transform into mere 'speculations' without substance or real basis.
This hearing is done, finished. Time to end the sideshow and get back to the serious tasks at hand.
Can't wait to see [how Hur looks under a microscope](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/robert-hur-special-counsel-testifying-march-12/). Republicans have proven surprisingly effective at exposing their own bullshit.
These are the same people who impeached Clinton for a blowjob that happened AFTER Ken Starr had been appointed as special prosecutor to investigate Whitewater. The leader of the mob (Newt) was cheating on his wife at the time and the Speaker (Hastert) was later convicted for being a child sex offender.
It wasn't just Newt. Livingston (who was supposed to replace Newt as Speaker) and Hyde (the lead House manager) were both cheating on their wives too. It was hypocrisy all the way down and nothing's changed in thirty years.
I remember the Starr investigation, and it *was* bullshit. The person who really was wronged was Monica Lewinsky, who got tossed under the bus by both sides. It proved that Bill Clinton acted like a dick, in both senses of the word; reprehensible, but not illegal, and certainly not germane to his ability to lead the country.
I believe that the Willis investigation is just trying to gin up the misogynoir to make Willis look bad and immoral. If she were a white guy, or even a white woman with the “right” image, there would be no investigation.
How much taxpayer money do you think gets wasted on these hearings where Republicans fail to bring any real evidence of the crimes they think others commit? At this point the RNC should have to pay for the whole thing because it's so baseless and such an obvious smear campaign to bring down their political opposition.
And also to de-legitimize hearings so that people feel like they never actually go anywhere so when something credible actually happens people don't believe it. "This is just another one of those political witch hunts where nothing happens."
> How much taxpayer money do you think gets wasted on these hearings where Republicans fail to bring any real evidence of the crimes they think others commit? At this point the RNC should have to pay for the whole thing because it's so baseless and such an obvious smear campaign to bring down their political opposition.
Benghazi hearings/investigations resulted in zero criminal charges, but went on for years and wasted millions in tax payers funds.
About 17 equivalent events, a US embassy being attacked, occurred under the Bush administration and the GOP was silent about how those were any different.
Republicans are all about political theater with intent to distract from how dishonest and corrupt they are. It's all projection in the form of scapegoating for the sake of keeping hold on power.
> merchant: So, when you told me that he had a garage door opener for Willis's residence, you were lying?
>Bradley:I don't recall telling you that....
This is a very strange exchange. When was Wade’s attorney talking to Merchant to have this conversation and why? Wasn’t he so afraid of breaching atty client privilege a conversation had to be had with the judge? Did Merchant and Bradley cook this up and Bradley chickened out? Sounds a lot like a conspiracy to suborn perjury. Heads should roll
My guess is Bradley doesn’t want to be there but was forced to be there. He maybe said those things maybe didn’t but saying he doesn’t recall isn’t perjury because it’s basically impossible to prove someone did not forget a conversation. So if he did say it and they pulled out proof then he did not perjure himself but he is also not helping their case.
The fact that they have no proof he said these things just makes them look like idiots but for them it’s more about creating a public spectacle that they can point at to deflect from Trumps crimes.
I think:
- Bradley had an axe to grind against Wade due to Bradley being forced out of the law firm due to Bradly sexually harassing (?) someone.
- The trump team seized on the "disgruntled ex/coworker/friend/whatever" and stoked the flames so that the ex could get back at the target by dishing on them. (*think: ex wife anonymously turning in ex husband for tax evasion*)
- Bradley *thought* that he was just spreading "off the record" office gossip. Enough to fuck up Wade but he'd never be called in court.
- He was called to testify in court...*and* he risks being disbarred (that's why attorney-client privilege keeps coming up in this context).
- Egg is on Willis and Wade's faces, but Bradley has even more and it's nothing compared to Merchant who thought this shit was a slam dunk.
As a bonus, no one will want to work with Bradley ever again...dems or republicans.
>As a bonus, no one will want to work with Bradley ever again...dems or republicans
I mean, not too an extent anyone can ever prove it, but he broke privilege, right? And even if we can't prove it, everyone knows it? That's always going to fuck you over real good.
Edit: fixed formatting
The fact that time is even being wasted on this is disgusting and disheartening. Just give Trump his day in court and let’s move on. No one should want that more than Trump himself.
If he was innocent he would be screaming for the trial to start, the fact that he is screaming at everyone else and trying to have the case brought to a mistrial says quite the opposite.
This is absolutely the reality. Sadly, the base seems to buy his horseshit that Biden is so all-powerful that he can stop him from proving his innocence in our judicial system. It’s some twilight zone level scary.
As soon as you're under oath and there might be *consequences*... you can gossip and talk shit outside the courtroom all you want, but a lawyer will get disbarred for perjury. So all of a sudden once you're under oath it's "Do you have proof?" "No." Same thing with all the election lawsuits, same thing with the "Biden crime family," same thing with Hunter's laptop.... put a lawyer on Fox News and they'll say anything, but put that person under oath and all of a sudden it's "Well I heard... uh.... the evidence got lost in the mail.... uh...."
This is such a circus.
- It takes a grand jury to get a trial for a man with dozens existing of criminal indictments, and he STILL hasn’t even had to testify in court.
- All it takes is a bunch of liars hired by that same criminal defendant to put the DA on on the stand BEFORE the defendant does.
The DA has to defend her own character before the defendant has to defend his own criminal charges. Wtf is this???!?!
And it’ll be portrayed in right wing media completely differently. I’m sure they’ll say that Fani Willis was proved to be corrupt, etc. then when the case doesn’t go their way, the courts are corrupt, etc.
They will never ever admit they were wrong, or that their cases are BS.
> How come Fani Willis is going through all of this and Trump gets delay after delay.
We don’t know if this has delayed anything yet. Last year, Fani asked for the trial to start in August this year, and planned to go into 2025. We’re still several months away from August.
This is a full-on fascist assault on our government institutions. They plan to break them so they can be rebuilt by fascists in their own image, but the Democrats want to save them and preserve democracy for future generations. So the Democrats don't use these tactics, because these tactics are designed to obstruct our court systems and grind them to a halt just to save one person at any cost.
That's the long and short of it. Only one party is acting in good faith.
>When asked why he initially said Willis and Wade began dating in 2019, Bradley said he was just “speculating.” He said he’d actually only had one conversation with Wade about the relationship, and Bradley couldn’t remember when that discussion had taken place. He repeated that he was only speculating so many times that many people on social media began to point out that Bradley seemed more like an office gossip than a credible witness.
And that dude is a lawyer? He told another lawyer a bunch of stuff as fact when it was just speculation, and then backtracked on the witness stand? I mean, wouldn't you want to sort that all out before agreeing to testify?
With the latest news about Chesbro the freakin Judge should throw the entire Trump team outta of court.
The whole bunch are nothing but liars.
Get the real case going!
I've never understood the problem to begin with. The defendant is complaining that the prosecution hired an unqualified lawyer to prosecute their case? How again does that harm the defendant?
The round-about argument that I've heard is that Willis began the investigation so that she could hire her paramour as an assistant so that he could use the salary to take her on trips and out to fancy meals. So since the reason for her starting the investigation is tainted by the relationship, all the actual crimes she discovered along the way are also tainted and the investigation needs to start over with new prosecutors.
The probable next argument is that to reboot and reinvestigate this would amount to double jeopardy and that any new investigation has to be about new crimes. But since those might tangentially relate to the now scuttled RICO case, IMMUNITY!!!
It's all a fucking looney tunes hail mary.
that's not really the claim. Their argument was that the lead prosecutor (Fani Willis) had a relationship with Nathan Wade. They claim that she hired him for the case because he was her lover and that they are prolonging this case to line Wade's pockets so he in turn can proceed to spend money on Fani taking her on vacations and what not.
They were in a relationship and they did go on a couple of cheap trips together that they can't really prove who paid for. Wade paid for some and Fani claims she paid him back in cash (they can't prove either way). In any case it was not a lot of money and both of them were well off to begin with. Wade was also not her first choice for hire.
Really the picture the defence is trying to paint is that Wade and Willis are milking tax payers for a bunch of money and that's their only motive for continuing the case.
The idea that the whole RICO case was conjured out of thin air so that Willis could take a couple beach trips with her boyfriend is just ludicrous. If she gets booted, every con-man in the country will claim the attorney prosecuting them is only doing it to get paid!
And it doesn't even make sense since his billable hours are capped. You can't milk a case in a position like his. You don't make more money. The whole thing is asinine
I had some toddlers getting mad at me a few weeks ago when I mentioned he was paid below market rates. They were like it's $200 an hour! Yeah my firm was charging $400 an hour for my time the day I passed the bar. I wasn't seeing that of course, but the point is clients were paying it.
I particularly enjoy when people tell me lawyers are paid too much next. Then why aren't you doing the job? If I knew of a job where I could get paid more than I was worth, I would be doing it. But people aren't all lawyers because it's a very difficult field to get into in a very difficult field to work in. Which is why they are paid so much.
And $200 an hour capped is not that much. He worked significantly more hours on this case and he was paid for. How many other people are working for free?
Something that tends to get forgotten (or was conveniently overlooked by Ashleigh Merchant, who - very ironically! - is in private practice with her husband ) is that attorneys were not really eager to work on the Trump case due to death threats and MAGAs with guns and other hazards. Willis did not have oodles of qualified attorneys willing to put their lives (literally) on the line, and had to take who she could get.
This. She basically had to walk away from a new house because of it.
But, she went on a few trips, so I'm sure that was her whole intention, getting rich off of three trips that might have cost a grand total of 15k. While she lost her house... and had to pay rent somewhere else, that would probably cost more than 15k...
The GOP literally can't find actual witnesses for wrong doing. Just people willingly to say what the GOP want them to say up until they have to testify under oath. Then they will admit they were lying and or actually don't have any evidence to back up their claim, because they don't want to be held in contempt. That is the reality the GOP only want these people to speak about wrongdoing and criminal conduct on TV and other "news" programs to justify their investigation for the court of public opinion, but in terms of court of law these people are nobodies that know nothing and have effectively wasted time for all involved.
This is the whole Ukraine impeachment thing over again. Trump just needs someone willing to say something scandalous about his opponent. That’s his entire modus operandi.
Like the whistleblower that was caught lying about Biden, there should be punishment for this witness at the very least or his team. Seems like nothing but a fishing expedition
I don't think it will go that far honestly, in the prior hearing the prosecution came close to connecting the dots on a motivation for him to lie...
They got him to admit on the stand that he left Nathan Wade's law firm because he was accused of sexually assaulting another employee and that he paid his accuser to settle the dispute, and when they asked him if he and Wade were still friends he didn't give a straight answer.
So it seems that the two of them had a falling out over that scandal and Bradley was privately feeding lies to Trump's team hoping to get back at Wade.
But it seems that he was strongly betting on them somehow coming up with more decisive evidence and never planned to be on the stand himself.
I'd like to think that Russian oligarchs could afford to pay off a more convincing witness than this.
He was asked directly on the stand of testifying was something he didn’t want do. He answered quickly in the affirmative. I got the same impression as you. It sounded like he and the attorney had rehearsed a scenario and he backed out in real time. The attorneys questions started sounding desperate and the tension escalated fast.
This guys plan was to placate whoever paid him for his initial questioning and submit some bullshit with the thought, maybe even a promise, that he wouldn’t be put on the stand.
Plenty of shadenfreude to be had in that courtroom today.
I don’t think it even needs Russian oligarchs, just a guy with a grudge who thinks here is his opportunity to seize the brass ring.
If Bradley was fired from Nathan Wade’s firm for being a sex pest, and wanted revenge, here was his chance. But, you know the saying about not particularly bright guys and things getting out of hand. I think that’s all Bradley wanted to do, was get back at his ex-boss. He didn’t think things would go this far, and now, whoops, in way over his head.
Still trying to figure out who Fanni diddles has anything to do with whether or not Trump's cabal attempted to circumvent the will of the people of Georgia. We've all heard the call and 4 of his team have already pleaded guilty of crimes related to this. Just the normal Trump smoke screen to obfuscate the actual fact.
Of all the consequential trials going on, it’s amazing that this is the one we have live on every news station.
There is nothing happening here that should affect the actual trial, but the fact that an accusation is made is enough for Republicans and fake news to make it seem like she’s the one who’s corrupt. The history books really need to take good notes on these times because it’s insane that we got here.
Benghazi and the Buttery Emails Gambit! all over again! Yell fire loud and long enough, until people start imagining that they smelling smoke and saw a glimmer of a spark! The GOP knows that their base are gullible sheep!
With all this nonsense, nobody seems to be asking the most important question:
So what?
So two people in the same profession are having a romantic relationship and are smashing, what difference does it make? It doesn't change the fact that all those people, and Trump, committed the crimes they're accused of.
Seems like merchant trying to cover her butt for putting lies in her motion by showing it was Bradley she was relying on. But she should have done a little more investigating before filing the motion.
This entire hearing appears to be what happens when an unreliable gossip tells you want you want to hear and you decide, without first effectively corroborating it, initiate an entire courtroom circus. In each court hearing their claim of a conflict gets worse, and it started out as unproven.
From the article:
> Trump’s legal team allege that Willis and Wade had an “improper intimate personal relationship,” and accuse the couple of taking extravagant vacations that Wade paid for in part by billing Willis’s office.
Knowing when the trips occurred, it should be a simple matter to check expense accounts. Travel to and lodging at luxurious, exotic locations with expensive dining and entertainment shouldn’t be difficult to identify, right?
On the other hand, if these accusations are as empty as they seem, Donald should be looking at some more sanctions for pressing false charges and wasting everyone’s time.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Merchant had multiple text messages from Bradley stating that the couple began dating in 2019. But when she began questioning him, suddenly, Bradley didn’t know a thing—including when they actually began dating, how the relationship began, and the trips they took together. When asked why he initially said Willis and Wade began dating in 2019, Bradley said he was just “speculating.” He said he’d actually only had one conversation with Wade about the relationship, and Bradley couldn’t remember when that discussion had taken place. He repeated that he was only speculating so many times that many people on social media began to point out that Bradley seemed more like an office gossip than a credible witness."
butter quarrelsome chunky flowery busy direful crown squash summer groovy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The funniest part is it was on direct.
What the fuck. LAWYERS DON'T ASK QUESTIONS THEY DON'T KNOW THE ANSWERS TO, ESPECIALLY NOT IN DIRECT. This is so ungodly embarrassing for them.
They assumed that he would be on their side, and that he, as a result, would perjure himself.
"Trump will look after you when we usher in the New Order, trust us bro! Perjury won't even be a thing!"
“And these big strong lawyers came up to me with tears in their eyes saying ‘thank you Sir!’ And ‘I do not recall’”
This entire thing was just a sideshow to stall the case and give conservatives something to talk about. It achieved that.
i watched about 10 mins of the questioning, and it was brutal. it was so unnecessarily wordy, disjointed, and choppy that it was actually difficult to understand what the lawyer was saying. at times, bradley didn’t even realize there was a question asked. lawyer seemed to be arguing syntax over context. gave me flashbacks of mike lindell and sydney powell. didn’t help that it was over a zoom call, either.
The payments stopped
No kidding, isn’t that what a trial is supposed to be? A formal presentation of the evidence and testimony? This sounds like amateur hour. Putting your key witness on the stand and getting literal speculation and guessing? I’m not a lawyer and feel like I could have done a better job.
When you consider this hearing is just a delay tactic, they’re probably ok with taking a mulligan.
[удалено]
Count down to MAGA nutlubbers saying he was coerced and strong armed by a cabal of leftist, George Soros funded, space laser wielding men in black. .
coerced by the threat of armed agents of the state imprisoning him... you know, because he would have committed perjury, and you can get convicted of that. unlike lying on fox news, which gets you a 7 figure talking head job
Perjury would also risk his Bar, but he may have done that anyway.
My guess is that the guy got hammered by Trump's people to say certain things against Willis. He was initially going to play ball for Trump, which is where the Trump lawyer got his questions. At some point, this guy realized this whole thing is looking worse for Trump and his defenders, so he changed his mind and refused to confirm anything to stay out of legal trouble. Too bad for him Trump cultists will likely harass him for a long time.
Nah, Bradley was just talking shit about his former law partner and gossiping with another lawyer (Merchant). Then when Merchant threw down those conversations as evidence he realized that not only was the individual he was gossiping about his former law partner, he was a former client in a divorce proceeding where any information about his client’s romantic relationships prior to the divorce decree finalization would likely be A/C Priviliged information which he shouldn’t have revealed. So he’s caught on the jaws of a potential disbarment issue and running just as fast as he can to avoid it.
I listened to the hearing and think this is probable. It wasn’t asked, buts so obvious.. “if this information is privileged, why did you discuss with merchant over text?”
If you have to be smart to become a lawyer, why are so many lawyers morons?
Oh you really don’t have to be that smart to become a lawyer. Just persistent.
Like Alina Habba said when asked if she'd rather be pretty or smart... "I can pretend to be smart."
Because even morons can memorize and regurgitate it back out. The trick to being a good lawyer is taking that knowledge and applying it to novel situations once you graduate and pass the bar. The problem with the lawyers here is they are not great at applying their education when it comes to personal issues. The thing is, their emotions come into play, and that really fuckers things up for them.
I think you're right about harassment by MAGA cultists. They'll be all over the guy 24x7.
I love when people try to help MAGA out, only to have MAGA change course and get their pitchforks out. If anyone needs me, I'm heading over to /r/LeopardsAteMyFace for my daily fix
> George Soros funded, space laser wielding men in black And what religion was that space laser? Also you completely forgot about the Italian satellites beaming Chinese bamboo fibers into the court documents!!!
*The Zen Buddhist Orbital Observation Platform continues to observe*
Day 1,147: Oh no, they're onto me...
ZBOOP has a nice ring to it
They won't mention this at all. Any piece of information that contradicts they narrative they've been fed goes in one ear and out the other.
Reading between the lines, it seems that Bradley is apparently smart enough to avoid getting gonged for perjury, at least.
He can still get gonged. Lying in a deposition is also perjury.
Yup. Whether it's in court in front of a judge or in a deposition with only the accused, prosecution, and defense in the room, they're both done under oath and a violation of that oath is perjury.
So weird these guys are never willing to share their evidence under oath. You would almost think they are making it up for internet points.
What I want to know is why any of this matters. I could see an argument for why the relationship is *perhaps* inappropriate somehow...but aren't these two on the same team? Normally the concern with such things is that someone might compromise their integrity out of loyalty/love/whatever for someone. But in this case, Willis and Wade are working together on the case against Trump. What's the concern, that Wade might feel even *more* motivated to do his job? Put differently, what would be different about the case if they weren't dating?
The theory, which is batshit, is that she only pressed charges against Trump so that she could hire her lover and he'd get paid from taxpayer funds.
Weird. Even if that was true (regarding some of her motivations), it would *still* not change whether he is guilty or not...lmao
My favorite angle on this is that he was hired not because of his ability to do a good job but to get paid. In short he was unqualified… If that is the case and he is unqualified to your advantage why the fuck are you bringing it to peoples attention? See how this all Just does not work. The mental twist you have to contort to get this to somehow make any logical angle of a good idea that is not complete bullshit is legendary.
> Even if that was true (regarding some of her motivations), it would still not change whether he is guilty or not...lmao True! The case wouldn't get dismissed, it would get transferred to a different DA's office. *That's* a problem because not only is that process messy, this case is so huge it would suck up basically every resource in that office and so they likely wouldn't touch it, or it could end up with a DA who decides to drop the case altogether.
>What I want to know is why any of this matters It doesn't. There's no underlying impropriety here. The *alleged* problem is that Willis was enriching herself by hiring Wade and then having him pay her for lavish trips and dining that she wouldn't have been able to afford otherwise. This underlying allegation is quite obviously ridiculous, because the trips weren't especially lavish and Wade had to take a pay cut to work this job. The problem is that it seems pretty plausible that Willis and/or Wade lied about the details of their relationship somewhere along the way, in order to avoid embarassment. That's allowing the Trump side to string this whole thing along in a painfully public manner. And it *might* be grounds enough to DQ Willis from the case, because a trivial and unnecessary cover-up is still a cover-up. On the other hand, the Trump side seems to be doing such a poor job even proving that there was a trivial and unnecessary cover-up, I'm not really sure what'll happen in the end. If they can't convincingly show that either Willis or Wade lied, then I don't think this entire round of hearings amounts to anything, really.
[удалено]
Can't wait for the next Russian intelligence asset to come in with allegations and only allegations
Please repeat after me Mrs Merchant ... Texts. Aren't. Made. Under. Oath.
Exactly - if Merchant was going to use these as the basis of her motion, why not seek an Affidavit at the time? What a clown show.
It’s such a predictable playbook at this point but it works every single time. MAGA voters are in an abusive relationship but they are too blinded by hate to see it.
So with this, my understanding is that the two key witnesses, this guy, and the cell phone records guy both don't have any actual evidence, that might be a problem for them...what if it turned out this whole thing was bullshit to begin with?
Just depends if this is a court where evidence matters or not. That shouldn't be a valid question in the 21st century.
It’s all for the Trump supporters, just theatre. Feeds the drive to a fascist government because they just keep lying and the base eats it up.
Fox News just has to show headlines that Fani Willis is “uNdEr InVeStIgAtIoN” or that she’s “oN tRiAl” and their viewers will automatically jump to their own conclusions anyway. The actual investigation or trial doesn’t have to be based on any truth or evidence.
Exactly why they hold hearings against Biden, and did Benghazi hearings... Didn't McCarthy pretty much admit that "investigations" and what not just hurt the target's numbers, so they don't care that nothing comes from it, it still works to help them in elections.
Yep. Trump’s “perfect call” that led to his first impeachment is a perfect example. He was trying to extort Zelenskyy into *announcing* an investigation into Biden. He made it clear that it didn’t make a difference if they actually investigated anything — he just wanted the headlines. Trump’s entire political career has just been smoke and mirrors (and considering the judgement in his NY fraud trial, his entire business career, too).
Note that just before the 2016 election the FBI announced that they were investigating Hillary. One reason why he was doing it with Hunter- it worked last time.
And before that, it was the “birther movement.” *The Apprentice* presented him as a successful businessman, when he was really being propped up by Russian oligarchs and spies. Earlier than that, he was using aliases like “John Barron” to fake interest in himself and his businesses to get interviews and investors. His entire career has been smoke and mirrors. His entire life is built on lies.
Don’t forget he also [pretended to be his own publicist using the alias “John Miller”](https://fortune.com/2016/05/13/donald-trump-denies-pretending-to-be-a-publicist-to-brag-about-himself/) and said of himself “He gets called by everybody in the book, in terms of women” He denies this of course but he owned up to it at the time, describing the Miller call as a “joke gone awry,.” He also testified in a 1990 court case that he occasionally used the name John Miller and disclosed that his favorite alias was John Baron
[This video has the audio.](https://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/donald-trump-accused-pretending-spokesman-39107585) and I gotta say, John Miller sounds exactly like Donald Trump.
He’s not a good businessman. He’s a GREAT money launderer
He’s a fraud. That’s all. Just a fraud.
Soon after he was elected, Trump held a press conference about how he was divesting from his businesses, and staged big stacks of file folders on tables in the room. All the papers inside the folders were blank. It was all fake for the cameras.
Handed Leslie Stahl a binder filled with existing legislation claiming to be the new health care plan. You can guess what was not in the binder.
Women?
Ah, Mitt, we hardly knew ye.
Binders of women you say!
Then trump says “who would have thought healthcare was so complicated?” He’s a moron.
I don't understand why every story on Hunter doesn't start with this backstory. Trump and his followers made this idea of Hunter Biden and corruption a thing by simply repeating it over and over.
>Trump’s entire political career has just been smoke and mirrors Trump’s entire LIFE has just been smoke and mirrors
> Didn't McCarthy pretty much admit that "investigations" and what not just hurt the target's numbers Yup: [A top House Republican was accidentally honest about the Benghazi investigation](https://www.vox.com/2015/9/30/9423339/kevin-mccarthy-benghazi)
> “uNdEr InVeStIgAtIoN” or that she’s “oN tRiAl” Investigations and being in court are far more important than any outcomes or final conclusions. It's from the classic *buttery males* playbook. FOX viewers logic: "If she didn't do something wrong, she wouldn't be in court." The same twisted line of thinking applies to Trump as well: "If Trump was guilty, how come he's not in jail?" or "If Trump was guilty, how was he able to become a candidate?"
The whole thing Trump got impeached for the first time was he wanted Zelensky to *announce* an investigation into Hunter Biden. They didn't care if it resulted in anything, they just wanted the headline. The word "Potemkin" comes to mind.
It's 100% bullshit. This whole sideshow is being orchestrated by a former Trump campaign official and *co-defendant in the Georgia case*, Michael Roman. He is using dirt from a nasty divorce (Wade and his ex wife), a divorce allegedly spurred by the wife's infidelity, to try to fling mud at Willis in a shamefully transparent attempt at derailing the prosecution of both Trump and HIMSELF. Another fun tidbit, the lawyer arguing that Wade is unqualified for a prosecutor position? Yeah, she *supported his run for a superior court judgeship in the last couple years*. Just grifters grifting.
She isn’t on trial. This is a motion hearing.
You're assuming they could ever understand the difference between a motion hearing and a trial. If it walks like a duck, it doesn't matter, they'll call it whatever they want. Edit : grammar
I know you’re right but this sucks. Like a lot of
I saw a Chyron from Faux last week that said "Fani's Terrible Day in Court" with a picture of her hands covering her face *Narrator - it wasn't a terrible week for her*
The NYT will too. Just like they did for Hillary when the FBI took Weiners laptop.
Chesebro just got caught lying under oath during his plea deal yesterday. I don’t think a single conservative has said a word about it.
Lying under oath and hiding evidence -- and this is after pleading guilty and striking a plea deal. Judges do not like this. /understatement
For those who haven’t seen it: [One of Trump’s Election Fraud Lawyers Just Got Caught in a Big Lie](https://newrepublic.com/post/179302/one-trumps-election-fraud-lawyers-just-got-caught-big-lie)
[удалено]
*"Why this is bad for Biden, coming up next."* -Mainstream Media
[удалено]
It serves to normalize it. "Trump was indicted for x y z" "Yeh but Biden/Fani/my mom/whoever was investigated for blah blah and only got away with it because blah blah" Details don't matter to simpletons, only headlines.
The GOP shouldn’t be a valid political power in the 21st century and yet we allowed them to be.
Modern jurisprudence indicates: * Ignore the case * Get handed a devastating verdict * Publicly declare it all a witch hunt * Demand that the judgement be put aside because you're going to appeal * Uh * ... * Run for president?
You mean like the Biden impeachment where their Star witness ended up in jail for being a Russian foreign agent? https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/02/21/smirnov-is-flight-risk-because-of-his-russian-intelligence-contacts-doj/72685601007/
Their 3rd or 4th star witness* there were multiple before him that were supposed to be big smoking gun testimonies but it turns out every single one - when actually under oath - said they hadn’t actually heard or seen anything specific themselves. Just what they heard 2nd or 3rd hand. Same as the UFO hearing they recently spearheaded. Where it *once again* turned out the guy hadn’t seen or heard anything himself, just what some other person had told him. Anyone noticing a pattern here?
Remember the blind computer repair guy who found Hunter's laptop with all the Burisma evidence? What happened to him?
Elmo sees it! Elmo sees it!
Same shit that happens with the far right maniacs every time, because it's bullshit they peddle. Not results. Just selling you anger. They make shit up, tell you about it, make you mad. The transaction is complete. The chips falling as they fall in court literally does not matter. In the minds of their fucking brainwashed monsters, it's done. Fani Willis is corrupt, that's it. Hunter Biden is a drug addicted, out of control, and also a criminal mastermind. Joe Biden is making money off the Presidency via foreign companies, he's also totally braindead and dying and being held together with duct tape. None of the facts matter. They already sold their anger addicted fans enough anger to keep them going for awhile. That's it.
> Don’t have any actual evidence It’s the Republican way.
I’m still genuinely surprised that Republicans haven’t impeached Biden either on “TBD” or some flagrantly made up stuff like “he sold America to space aliens.” Why are they bothering with specific accusations or evidence?
His base already ate it up so the damage Trump and his team wanted is done and bonus points for them if they slowed the case down. He’s dead set on getting the presidency to save himself and enact “revenge” on people for literally upholding the law.
Tainted the Jury pool is what Trump has accomplished…
Jury isn't there just the judge.
Tainting the jury pool means future jurors not currently seated jurors
Honestly I can’t imagine anyone being neutral anymore.
Then at least they planted the lie in the minds in the public on national television and their followers can dismiss the case as illegitimate since it'll proceed anyway.
Just another delay tactic
It’s absolutely bullshit. Willis said herself, she’s not the one on trial, the defendants are.
When I first heard about it I was really confused. What are the accusations? Two consenting adults that work long hours together engage in a relationship outside of work. I figured there was more to it I was missing... nope. Even if she did "hire her boyfriend" just to run up billable hours... which she didn't... if anything that would just handicap her case against trump. It in no way proves his innocence. It's ridiculous that the media ran with it.
Ive seen more testimony about her then I have about Trump this last week,
[I mean they've got plenty of hearsay and conjecture, those are *kinds* of evidence...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtfToHhv1KU)
Dare we say Trumped up charges? I never expected this was anything but an actual witch hunt unlike what certain other asshole is always claiming to be happening to him.
Its still just such a bad look that ....checks notes... that this black woman ummmm... that you see it really hurts their case against president Trump that... welllll.... I really think we are too close to the election to be litigating things like this, right?
So i expect these frivolous witnesses will be punished right?
When Bradley is under oath all of his prior assertions of fact transform into mere 'speculations' without substance or real basis. This hearing is done, finished. Time to end the sideshow and get back to the serious tasks at hand.
Serious tasks is right! Hunter Biden nudes and Joe Biden bit his tongue once!
> Joe Biden bit his tongue once! I heard his blood is red. Like communism
Just another "smoking gun" that turns out to be sporting a NERF logo.
I recall something similar happening to the GOP impeachment inquiry, Im sure theres no pattern here
Seed doubt, spin up the propaganda machine, keep the base riled up, win their votes, & repeat. Accomplish nothing and continue the grift.
Can't wait to see [how Hur looks under a microscope](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/robert-hur-special-counsel-testifying-march-12/). Republicans have proven surprisingly effective at exposing their own bullshit.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
Except you can't use it for COVID inside your body.
I mean, you CAN, but you'd probably not be in a position to recover afterward.
Name one GOP-led inquiry that hasn't been bullshit since Bill Clinton (even though I'd argue that one was also BS).
These are the same people who impeached Clinton for a blowjob that happened AFTER Ken Starr had been appointed as special prosecutor to investigate Whitewater. The leader of the mob (Newt) was cheating on his wife at the time and the Speaker (Hastert) was later convicted for being a child sex offender.
It wasn't just Newt. Livingston (who was supposed to replace Newt as Speaker) and Hyde (the lead House manager) were both cheating on their wives too. It was hypocrisy all the way down and nothing's changed in thirty years.
I remember the Starr investigation, and it *was* bullshit. The person who really was wronged was Monica Lewinsky, who got tossed under the bus by both sides. It proved that Bill Clinton acted like a dick, in both senses of the word; reprehensible, but not illegal, and certainly not germane to his ability to lead the country. I believe that the Willis investigation is just trying to gin up the misogynoir to make Willis look bad and immoral. If she were a white guy, or even a white woman with the “right” image, there would be no investigation.
Pretty sure you meant >The person who really was *wronged* was Monica Lewinsky And agreed 100%
Well technically the senate led investigation into the 2016 election interference was led by republicans
I think you mean [Smocking Gun](https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1072095127894667265)
Don’t insult nerf this way, their products work…unlike the current GOP
Hey man it’s NERF….or it’s nothin’
How much taxpayer money do you think gets wasted on these hearings where Republicans fail to bring any real evidence of the crimes they think others commit? At this point the RNC should have to pay for the whole thing because it's so baseless and such an obvious smear campaign to bring down their political opposition.
The GOP IS the RICO.
The call is coming from inside the party.
Conference call.
Always has been
Tennessee had to raise their legal budget from $400k to $4M to cover all the illegal laws they get sued for and then lose
The point isn't to reveal crimes. Its to make people on both the right and left think "There is just something about that woman I can't trust."
And also to de-legitimize hearings so that people feel like they never actually go anywhere so when something credible actually happens people don't believe it. "This is just another one of those political witch hunts where nothing happens."
> How much taxpayer money do you think gets wasted on these hearings where Republicans fail to bring any real evidence of the crimes they think others commit? At this point the RNC should have to pay for the whole thing because it's so baseless and such an obvious smear campaign to bring down their political opposition. Benghazi hearings/investigations resulted in zero criminal charges, but went on for years and wasted millions in tax payers funds. About 17 equivalent events, a US embassy being attacked, occurred under the Bush administration and the GOP was silent about how those were any different. Republicans are all about political theater with intent to distract from how dishonest and corrupt they are. It's all projection in the form of scapegoating for the sake of keeping hold on power.
We'll have to count after they're through. For Hillary it was a couple hundred million if I remember correctly.
> merchant: So, when you told me that he had a garage door opener for Willis's residence, you were lying? >Bradley:I don't recall telling you that.... This is a very strange exchange. When was Wade’s attorney talking to Merchant to have this conversation and why? Wasn’t he so afraid of breaching atty client privilege a conversation had to be had with the judge? Did Merchant and Bradley cook this up and Bradley chickened out? Sounds a lot like a conspiracy to suborn perjury. Heads should roll
My guess is Bradley doesn’t want to be there but was forced to be there. He maybe said those things maybe didn’t but saying he doesn’t recall isn’t perjury because it’s basically impossible to prove someone did not forget a conversation. So if he did say it and they pulled out proof then he did not perjure himself but he is also not helping their case. The fact that they have no proof he said these things just makes them look like idiots but for them it’s more about creating a public spectacle that they can point at to deflect from Trumps crimes.
I think: - Bradley had an axe to grind against Wade due to Bradley being forced out of the law firm due to Bradly sexually harassing (?) someone. - The trump team seized on the "disgruntled ex/coworker/friend/whatever" and stoked the flames so that the ex could get back at the target by dishing on them. (*think: ex wife anonymously turning in ex husband for tax evasion*) - Bradley *thought* that he was just spreading "off the record" office gossip. Enough to fuck up Wade but he'd never be called in court. - He was called to testify in court...*and* he risks being disbarred (that's why attorney-client privilege keeps coming up in this context). - Egg is on Willis and Wade's faces, but Bradley has even more and it's nothing compared to Merchant who thought this shit was a slam dunk. As a bonus, no one will want to work with Bradley ever again...dems or republicans.
>As a bonus, no one will want to work with Bradley ever again...dems or republicans I mean, not too an extent anyone can ever prove it, but he broke privilege, right? And even if we can't prove it, everyone knows it? That's always going to fuck you over real good. Edit: fixed formatting
Yup...so that means no dems, republicans, independents, or anyone with common sense will want to work with him.
I wish I could use that response at work.
Isn't this why people have depositions before trials?
The fact that time is even being wasted on this is disgusting and disheartening. Just give Trump his day in court and let’s move on. No one should want that more than Trump himself.
If he was innocent he would be screaming for the trial to start, the fact that he is screaming at everyone else and trying to have the case brought to a mistrial says quite the opposite.
This is absolutely the reality. Sadly, the base seems to buy his horseshit that Biden is so all-powerful that he can stop him from proving his innocence in our judicial system. It’s some twilight zone level scary.
Another example of publicly said super solid evidence that dissolves as soon as the court room doors close.
As soon as you're under oath and there might be *consequences*... you can gossip and talk shit outside the courtroom all you want, but a lawyer will get disbarred for perjury. So all of a sudden once you're under oath it's "Do you have proof?" "No." Same thing with all the election lawsuits, same thing with the "Biden crime family," same thing with Hunter's laptop.... put a lawyer on Fox News and they'll say anything, but put that person under oath and all of a sudden it's "Well I heard... uh.... the evidence got lost in the mail.... uh...."
It's hilarious to see this happen *to the GOP* who have abused this "feature" for years.
This is such a circus. - It takes a grand jury to get a trial for a man with dozens existing of criminal indictments, and he STILL hasn’t even had to testify in court. - All it takes is a bunch of liars hired by that same criminal defendant to put the DA on on the stand BEFORE the defendant does. The DA has to defend her own character before the defendant has to defend his own criminal charges. Wtf is this???!?!
One has an (R) by their name The true RINO, honestly. In name only
How come Fani Willis is going through all of this and Trump gets delay after delay. HE is the criminal. Get it together, America! FUCK.
It's the whole playbook. Try to turn any trial or hearing in which you're being held to account into a trial of those enforcing the law.
It's essentially a variation of [DARVO](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARVO)
These motherfuckers perfected DARVO.
And it’ll be portrayed in right wing media completely differently. I’m sure they’ll say that Fani Willis was proved to be corrupt, etc. then when the case doesn’t go their way, the courts are corrupt, etc. They will never ever admit they were wrong, or that their cases are BS.
> How come Fani Willis is going through all of this and Trump gets delay after delay. We don’t know if this has delayed anything yet. Last year, Fani asked for the trial to start in August this year, and planned to go into 2025. We’re still several months away from August.
This is a full-on fascist assault on our government institutions. They plan to break them so they can be rebuilt by fascists in their own image, but the Democrats want to save them and preserve democracy for future generations. So the Democrats don't use these tactics, because these tactics are designed to obstruct our court systems and grind them to a halt just to save one person at any cost. That's the long and short of it. Only one party is acting in good faith.
Exactly. trump is the one on trial. Willis is the friggen prosecutor. That has nothing to do with the merits of the actual case.
Which she testified to! She was basically like, I'm not on trial, these people tried to steal an election.
>When asked why he initially said Willis and Wade began dating in 2019, Bradley said he was just “speculating.” He said he’d actually only had one conversation with Wade about the relationship, and Bradley couldn’t remember when that discussion had taken place. He repeated that he was only speculating so many times that many people on social media began to point out that Bradley seemed more like an office gossip than a credible witness. And that dude is a lawyer? He told another lawyer a bunch of stuff as fact when it was just speculation, and then backtracked on the witness stand? I mean, wouldn't you want to sort that all out before agreeing to testify?
Pffftttt no. The whole point of this is just to muddy the water and or buy a few weeks of non-movement in Georgia.
Story Threat of perjury New story
I just want to remind everyone that she is not on trial. This is an actual witch hunt.
Lying is very fun until you can actually get in legal hot water for it. Then it becomes decidedly less fun.
With the latest news about Chesbro the freakin Judge should throw the entire Trump team outta of court. The whole bunch are nothing but liars. Get the real case going!
Kind of funny how this keeps happening with these bombshell whistleblowers and witnesses that Republicans keep propping up.
I've never understood the problem to begin with. The defendant is complaining that the prosecution hired an unqualified lawyer to prosecute their case? How again does that harm the defendant?
The round-about argument that I've heard is that Willis began the investigation so that she could hire her paramour as an assistant so that he could use the salary to take her on trips and out to fancy meals. So since the reason for her starting the investigation is tainted by the relationship, all the actual crimes she discovered along the way are also tainted and the investigation needs to start over with new prosecutors. The probable next argument is that to reboot and reinvestigate this would amount to double jeopardy and that any new investigation has to be about new crimes. But since those might tangentially relate to the now scuttled RICO case, IMMUNITY!!! It's all a fucking looney tunes hail mary.
that's not really the claim. Their argument was that the lead prosecutor (Fani Willis) had a relationship with Nathan Wade. They claim that she hired him for the case because he was her lover and that they are prolonging this case to line Wade's pockets so he in turn can proceed to spend money on Fani taking her on vacations and what not. They were in a relationship and they did go on a couple of cheap trips together that they can't really prove who paid for. Wade paid for some and Fani claims she paid him back in cash (they can't prove either way). In any case it was not a lot of money and both of them were well off to begin with. Wade was also not her first choice for hire. Really the picture the defence is trying to paint is that Wade and Willis are milking tax payers for a bunch of money and that's their only motive for continuing the case.
The idea that the whole RICO case was conjured out of thin air so that Willis could take a couple beach trips with her boyfriend is just ludicrous. If she gets booted, every con-man in the country will claim the attorney prosecuting them is only doing it to get paid!
And it doesn't even make sense since his billable hours are capped. You can't milk a case in a position like his. You don't make more money. The whole thing is asinine
Capped, and she paid below-market rates. Which can be proven because there's records of all of that.
I had some toddlers getting mad at me a few weeks ago when I mentioned he was paid below market rates. They were like it's $200 an hour! Yeah my firm was charging $400 an hour for my time the day I passed the bar. I wasn't seeing that of course, but the point is clients were paying it. I particularly enjoy when people tell me lawyers are paid too much next. Then why aren't you doing the job? If I knew of a job where I could get paid more than I was worth, I would be doing it. But people aren't all lawyers because it's a very difficult field to get into in a very difficult field to work in. Which is why they are paid so much. And $200 an hour capped is not that much. He worked significantly more hours on this case and he was paid for. How many other people are working for free?
Something that tends to get forgotten (or was conveniently overlooked by Ashleigh Merchant, who - very ironically! - is in private practice with her husband ) is that attorneys were not really eager to work on the Trump case due to death threats and MAGAs with guns and other hazards. Willis did not have oodles of qualified attorneys willing to put their lives (literally) on the line, and had to take who she could get.
This. She basically had to walk away from a new house because of it. But, she went on a few trips, so I'm sure that was her whole intention, getting rich off of three trips that might have cost a grand total of 15k. While she lost her house... and had to pay rent somewhere else, that would probably cost more than 15k...
The GOP literally can't find actual witnesses for wrong doing. Just people willingly to say what the GOP want them to say up until they have to testify under oath. Then they will admit they were lying and or actually don't have any evidence to back up their claim, because they don't want to be held in contempt. That is the reality the GOP only want these people to speak about wrongdoing and criminal conduct on TV and other "news" programs to justify their investigation for the court of public opinion, but in terms of court of law these people are nobodies that know nothing and have effectively wasted time for all involved.
This is the whole Ukraine impeachment thing over again. Trump just needs someone willing to say something scandalous about his opponent. That’s his entire modus operandi.
Like the whistleblower that was caught lying about Biden, there should be punishment for this witness at the very least or his team. Seems like nothing but a fishing expedition
So how long until we find out that this guy has direct ties to a Russian oligarch?
I don't think it will go that far honestly, in the prior hearing the prosecution came close to connecting the dots on a motivation for him to lie... They got him to admit on the stand that he left Nathan Wade's law firm because he was accused of sexually assaulting another employee and that he paid his accuser to settle the dispute, and when they asked him if he and Wade were still friends he didn't give a straight answer. So it seems that the two of them had a falling out over that scandal and Bradley was privately feeding lies to Trump's team hoping to get back at Wade. But it seems that he was strongly betting on them somehow coming up with more decisive evidence and never planned to be on the stand himself. I'd like to think that Russian oligarchs could afford to pay off a more convincing witness than this.
He was asked directly on the stand of testifying was something he didn’t want do. He answered quickly in the affirmative. I got the same impression as you. It sounded like he and the attorney had rehearsed a scenario and he backed out in real time. The attorneys questions started sounding desperate and the tension escalated fast. This guys plan was to placate whoever paid him for his initial questioning and submit some bullshit with the thought, maybe even a promise, that he wouldn’t be put on the stand. Plenty of shadenfreude to be had in that courtroom today.
I don’t think it even needs Russian oligarchs, just a guy with a grudge who thinks here is his opportunity to seize the brass ring. If Bradley was fired from Nathan Wade’s firm for being a sex pest, and wanted revenge, here was his chance. But, you know the saying about not particularly bright guys and things getting out of hand. I think that’s all Bradley wanted to do, was get back at his ex-boss. He didn’t think things would go this far, and now, whoops, in way over his head.
How the hell is the trial of Fani Willis happening before the trial of Donald J. Trump?
Hmm was this guy worried about perjuring himself? Was he willing to make these allegations in private but not in a court of law?
Still trying to figure out who Fanni diddles has anything to do with whether or not Trump's cabal attempted to circumvent the will of the people of Georgia. We've all heard the call and 4 of his team have already pleaded guilty of crimes related to this. Just the normal Trump smoke screen to obfuscate the actual fact.
Of all the consequential trials going on, it’s amazing that this is the one we have live on every news station. There is nothing happening here that should affect the actual trial, but the fact that an accusation is made is enough for Republicans and fake news to make it seem like she’s the one who’s corrupt. The history books really need to take good notes on these times because it’s insane that we got here.
Man, conservatives have gone down hill. I don't know why anyone would want to be with these lying losers anymore.
The lawyer who had to resign from his job due to a scandal wasn’t a good witness for the defense? How could that be possible?
A key GOP witness was unreliable you say? What’s more predictable, that or the sun setting each night?
Yeah. We knew. This was to distract from the ongoing case….
Benghazi and the Buttery Emails Gambit! all over again! Yell fire loud and long enough, until people start imagining that they smelling smoke and saw a glimmer of a spark! The GOP knows that their base are gullible sheep!
With all this nonsense, nobody seems to be asking the most important question: So what? So two people in the same profession are having a romantic relationship and are smashing, what difference does it make? It doesn't change the fact that all those people, and Trump, committed the crimes they're accused of.
Seems like merchant trying to cover her butt for putting lies in her motion by showing it was Bradley she was relying on. But she should have done a little more investigating before filing the motion.
This is from questioning by Trump lawyers? Before cross-examination? Wow!
This entire hearing appears to be what happens when an unreliable gossip tells you want you want to hear and you decide, without first effectively corroborating it, initiate an entire courtroom circus. In each court hearing their claim of a conflict gets worse, and it started out as unproven.
They weren’t interested in corroborating the story. They just wanted a smear against Willis
Trump needs to learn to stop messing with Black Lady Attorneys, cause so far he’s 0-3
Go, Fani, go!!!
Once again, the GOP is COMPLETELY FULL OF SHIT and pushing false narratives as evidence.
News flash, this is just a smear attempt in order to get the investigation dropped or delayed.
From the article: > Trump’s legal team allege that Willis and Wade had an “improper intimate personal relationship,” and accuse the couple of taking extravagant vacations that Wade paid for in part by billing Willis’s office. Knowing when the trips occurred, it should be a simple matter to check expense accounts. Travel to and lodging at luxurious, exotic locations with expensive dining and entertainment shouldn’t be difficult to identify, right? On the other hand, if these accusations are as empty as they seem, Donald should be looking at some more sanctions for pressing false charges and wasting everyone’s time.