Pending indictment against Trump in Georgia

213,805 Views | 2428 Replies | Last: 5 days ago by TXAggie2011
aggiejayrod
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

1872walker said:

Right. Is that not why Cross burned him? To cast doubt in the judge's mind about his truthfulness when considering Bradley's text conversation with Merchant? An attempt to spoil the entire thing?
If that was their reasoning, it was dumb. And there will be some major blowback from that, I suspect. I guess once the judge ruled he would view the Bradley to Merchant texts and emails in camera, nothing to lose by burying a very cooperative witness for Wade and Willis in as spectacular a manner as possible.

I have said before that the Fulton County DA's office is corrupt as hell and ruthless. Today took it to a whole new level.


I'm catching up still and my jaw literally dropped when Cross pulled that. And then she calls another witness to discredit someone who was helpful for her case? Jesus f'ing Christ. Did Bradley bang Cross's mom and/or sister? He's done in Georgia now. He perjured himself pretty obviously.

And they closed without even trying to discredit Yeartle? Wow
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

And they closed without even trying to discredit Yeartle? Wow
The judge was in shock and fumbled around for awhile trying to figure out how to handle this hearing now.

I heard him say once that he could reopen the evidence at a later date if he deems it necessary to get further info from Bradley. I must have missed the part about Yeartie. What was Fani's lawyer going to accuse her of? Being on drugs? A lousy worker while in Fani's employ (which they have already suggested) or something even worse? Cheating on her husband?

I mean there is impeachment of credibility evidence and then there is what happened to Bradley, a Howitzer shot.
Who?mikejones!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Can someone explain to me like I'm a child what the hell is going on
aggiejayrod
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

Quote:

And they closed without even trying to discredit Yeartle? Wow
The judge was in shock and fumbled around for awhile trying to figure out how to handle this hearing now.

I heard him say once that he could reopen the evidence at a later date if he deems it necessary to get further info from Bradley. I must have missed the part about Yeartie. What was Fani's lawyer going to accuse her of? Being on drugs? A lousy worker while in Fani's employ (which they have already suggested) or something even worse? Cheating on her husband?

I mean there is impeachment of credibility evidence and then there is what happened to Bradley, a Howitzer shot.


I didn't listen to her testimony but I believe Yeartle confirmed the whole relationship started before Fani and Wade claim it did. You'd think the State would want to impeach her credibility even a little bit. Something like "she's claiming that because she's mad at her former friend firing her"
LRHF
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Agthatbuilds said:

Can someone explain to me like I'm a child what the hell is going on


Oops wrong thread!
aggiejayrod
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Agthatbuilds said:

Can someone explain to me like I'm a child what the hell is going on


You see…when a mommy and daddy don't love each other any more and daddy wants to bang the District Attorney so he can get lucrative contracts….

Basically, Wade and Fani were dating (likely before he divorced his wife), Fani appointed Wade as the special prosecutor in charge of this whole RICO case against Trump. Defense counsel recently found out about the relationship and are trying to get Fani and Wade kicked off the case. They went on a bunch of trips together after he was appointed which he paid for and she claims he repaid with cash she had around the house. So of course she has no receipts or evidence of repaying him.

There's a ton of defense lawyers since they charged 19 people here and all are tag teaming questions against witnesses. There's a ton of smoke here and if the judge is fair he's gotta see that this whole relationship is shady af and they need to appoint someone new.
aggiejayrod
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:


I mean there is impeachment of credibility evidence and then there is what happened to Bradley, a Howitzer shot.


Howitzer is an understatement. They went nuclear on him. They burned his house down, pissed in the ashes, and tried to take a dump on his grave before the judge threw in the towel on the catty witness.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Agthatbuilds said:

Can someone explain to me like I'm a child what the hell is going on
When we left off yesterday, Fani was still on the stand and her direct examination was done, meaning Fani's team was up this monring to cross her to rehabilitate that disaster of her testimony. I expected some late night cramming to get some documents about her cash stash being timed with the trips to bolster her claims she paid him in cash.

Instead, her lawyers declined to cross her so she was not even called to the stand. That left the defense attorneys scrambling because their next witness, Terrance Bradley, Wade's former law partner and one of the sources of Merchant's allegations, was MIA, allegedly for a Doctor's appointment.

So the judge allowed the state to present some of their witnesses out of order until Bradley could get to court.

First off for Wade and Willis was a former (Dem) Georgia Governor (and lawyer) Roy Barnes. Only thing he could testify to is that Willis and Wade approached him in late October 2021 to be Special Prosecutor for this case. He declined.

Next Willis witness was her father, another lawyer, former Black Panther member, world traveler, saw Covid coming back in 2019 while living in South Africa (he got booted out of SA, for some "political" reason) and was dazzling himself with his own brilliance. Apple didn't fall far from that tree, humility doesn't run in that family, apparently. He moved in with Fani (after being kicked out of SA) late summer of 2019 and Fani was bofing some DJ named "Deuce" that he met and knew about only because he was living with her. (Fani and her father don't talk much apparently.) Never met Wade until 2023.

Dad also testified that about a month after Fani was sworn in as Fulton County DA, their home was vandalized, people were gathered outside, hurling racial epithets and making threats. He claimed the police were called often and that he called them yet zero police reports of those calls were never produced (hmm). So he was heavily into playing the race card. Said "it was a black thing" to hoard cash. (It's more of a Great Depression thing when so many banks failed but whatever.) He also confirmed that he had seen Wade's testimony and his daughter's from the day before.

Now let's go back to the fact that Mr. Floyd is a lawyer who knows what a sequestration order for witnesses is. He's know he was being called as a witness, at the very latest, by Monday of this week but probably earlier than that. So his violation of the sequestration order was very blatant, nor did he appear to care much. Blamed the media saying he couldn't watch the news, read his newspapers, nor view his feeds without seeing it. Well, hello! That's exactly what a sequestration order instructs a witness to do. Avoid those.

Lunch recess and then the main show, Terrance Bradley, Wade's former law "partner" (they were pretty loose with their definitions on what constitutes a law partnership, but I digress.) Bradley's whole testimony is overshadowed by the attorney client privilege because he was Wade's lawyer on the divorce. Judge lets Merchant et. al. to proceed with Fani's team able to object on privilege grounds on a question by question basis.

Then the real fun for today started. Fani's lawyers were objecting to nearly every question even before defense counsel had completed it. (There's some backstory to this I can provide in a separate post if you request) For hours Bradley is on the stand, hemming, hawing, letting counsel argue it out before the judge but in general remaining mum about what he knew about Fani and Wade under the cloaking device known as attorney client privilege. He tap danced like Gregory Hines but he never gave up Wade nor Willis. Even the judge was getting tired of that and ruled he would conduct an in camera ex parte review of the issues about attorney client privilege and then rule after. Defense was okay with that because the judge would then see all of the texts, emails, etc. that Bradley had provided to Merchant.

Then the questionin turned to when and why Bradley had left the firm in 2022. There was a "disagreement" between him and Wade. Said disagreement was "assessed" to be under the attorney client privilege for Wade's divorce case...by Bradley. Judge had no reason to question that at the time so he went along with Bradley on that issue. Multiple defense counsel tried different approaches but to no avail.

Then, drumroll please, Fani's lead lawyer Anna Cross stands up to cross Bradley. BOOM! She asks him if the reason he was forced out of the firm with Wade because he was accused of sexually assaulting an employee of the firm. Assault, not harrassment. Anna Cross in a few questions, blew up his law license, his current practice, maybe his family life. The judge is shocked and non-plussed. he asks Cross a kind of WTF? question and she calmly replies, "He lied."

I know, TLDR but you asked.
one safe place
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggiehawg said:

Agthatbuilds said:

Can someone explain to me like I'm a child what the hell is going on
When we left off yesterday, Fani was still on the stand and her direct examination was done, meaning Fani's team was up this monring to cross her to rehabilitate that disaster of her testimony. I expected some late night cramming to get some documents about her cash stash being timed with the trips to bolster her claims she paid him in cash.

Instead, her lawyers declined to cross her so she was not even called to the stand. That left the defense attorneys scrambling because their next witness, Terrance Bradley, Wade's former law partner and one of the sources of Merchant's allegations, was MIA, allegedly for a Doctor's appointment.

So the judge allowed the state to present some of their witnesses out of order until Bradley could get to court.

First off for Wade and Willis was a former (Dem) Georgia Governor (and lawyer) Roy Barnes. Only thing he could testify to is that Willis and Wade approached him in late October 2021 to be Special Prosecutor for this case. He declined.

Next Willis witness was her father, another lawyer, former Black Panther member, world traveler, saw Covid coming back in 2019 while living in South Africa (he got booted out of SA, for some "political" reason) and was dazzling himself with his own brilliance. Apple didn't fall far from that tree, humility doesn't run in that family, apparently. He moved in with Fani (after being kicked out of SA) late summer of 2019 and Fani was bofing some DJ named "Deuce" that he met and knew about only because he was living with her. (Fani and her father don't talk much apparently.) Never met Wade until 2023.

Dad also testified that about a month after Fani was sworn in as Fulton County DA, their home was vandalized, people were gathered outside, hurling racial epithets and making threats. He claimed the police were called often and that he called them yet zero police reports of those calls were never produced (hmm). So he was heavily into playing the race card. Said "it was a black thing" to hoard cash. (It's more of a Great Depression thing when so many banks failed but whatever.) He also confirmed that he had seen Wade's testimony and his daughter's from the day before.

Now let's go back to the fact that Mr. Floyd is a lawyer who knows what a sequestration order for witnesses is. He's know he was being called as a witness, at the very latest, by Monday of this week but probably earlier than that. So his violation of the sequestration order was very blatant, nor did he appear to care much. Blamed the media saying he couldn't watch the news, read his newspapers, nor view his feeds without seeing it. Well, hello! That's exactly what a sequestration order instructs a witness to do. Avoid those.

Lunch recess and then the main show, Terrance Bradley, Wade's former law "partner" (they were pretty loose with their definitions on what constitutes a law partnership, but I digress.) Bradley's whole testimony is overshadowed by the attorney client privilege because he was Wade's lawyer on the divorce. Judge lets Merchant et. al. to proceed with Fani's team able to object on privilege grounds on a question by question basis.

Then the real fun for today started. Fani's lawyers were objecting to nearly every question even before defense counsel had completed it. (There's some backstory to this I can provide in a separate post if you request) For hours Bradley is on the stand, hemming, hawing, letting counsel argue it out before the judge but in general remaining mum about what he knew about Fani and Wade under the cloaking device known as attorney client privilege. He tap danced like Gregory Hines but he never gave up Wade nor Willis. Even the judge was getting tired of that and ruled he would conduct an in camera ex parte review of the issues about attorney client privilege and then rule after. Defense was okay with that because the judge would then see all of the texts, emails, etc. that Bradley had provided to Merchant.

Then the questionin turned to when and why Bradley had left the firm in 2022. There was a "disagreement" between him and Wade. Said disagreement was "assessed" to be under the attorney client privilege for Wade's divorce case...by Bradley. Judge had no reason to question that at the time so he went along with Bradley on that issue. Multiple defense counsel tried different approaches but to no avail.

Then, drumroll please, Fani's lead lawyer Anna Cross stands up to cross Bradley. BOOM! She asks him if the reason he was forced out of the firm with Wade because he was accused of sexually assaulting an employee of the firm. Assault, not harrassment. Anna Cross in a few questions, blew up his law license, his current practice, maybe his family life. The judge is shocked and non-plussed. he asks Cross a kind of WTF? question and she calmly replies, "He lied."

I know, TLDR but you asked.
Very informative Aggiehawg, thanks for posting that and explaining it the way you did.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiejayrod said:

aggiehawg said:

Quote:

And they closed without even trying to discredit Yeartle? Wow
The judge was in shock and fumbled around for awhile trying to figure out how to handle this hearing now.

I heard him say once that he could reopen the evidence at a later date if he deems it necessary to get further info from Bradley. I must have missed the part about Yeartie. What was Fani's lawyer going to accuse her of? Being on drugs? A lousy worker while in Fani's employ (which they have already suggested) or something even worse? Cheating on her husband?

I mean there is impeachment of credibility evidence and then there is what happened to Bradley, a Howitzer shot.


I didn't listen to her testimony but I believe Yeartle confirmed the whole relationship started before Fani and Wade claim it did. You'd think the State would want to impeach her credibility even a little bit. Something like "she's claiming that because she's mad at her former friend firing her"
I did listen to her zoom testimony. She wa suncomfortable (maybe afraid?) but she was clear in her answers. She answered yes or no nearly everytime. Let me say, yes that is sign of a well prepped witness BUT it is also a sign of witness that is very confident in her answers. She knows what she knows. She got drawn into this against her will but she's not going to lie to protect Fani.
aezmvp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TLDR Aggiehawg:

Georgia people doing things as they have been for 200+ years.

Thanks hawg!
one safe place
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PS, it wasn't TLDR, and I read it all. Not a lawyer but passed the law part of the CPA exam with very little preparation. I attribute that to having been a huge fan of Algonquin J. Calhoun.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aezmvp said:

TLDR Aggiehawg:

Georgia people doing things as they have been for 200+ years.

Thanks hawg!
There's a lot more about how corrupt Fulton County DA's office is and how transparent defense counsel has been with them.

I never had this type of issue when I practiced but Jeebus, Merchant GAVE HER ONLY CELL PHONE TO FANI"S LAWYERS!

That was another insane moment. And wen they gave her phone back, she had to to reorganize her screenshots because they messed with her phone.
AgCat93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

Agthatbuilds said:

Can someone explain to me like I'm a child what the hell is going on
When we left off yesterday, Fani was still on the stand and her direct examination was done, meaning Fani's team was up this monring to cross her to rehabilitate that disaster of her testimony. I expected some late night cramming to get some documents about her cash stash being timed with the trips to bolster her claims she paid him in cash.

Instead, her lawyers declined to cross her so she was not even called to the stand. That left the defense attorneys scrambling because their next witness, Terrance Bradley, Wade's former law partner and one of the sources of Merchant's allegations, was MIA, allegedly for a Doctor's appointment.

So the judge allowed the state to present some of their witnesses out of order until Bradley could get to court.

First off for Wade and Willis was a former (Dem) Georgia Governor (and lawyer) Roy Barnes. Only thing he could testify to is that Willis and Wade approached him in late October 2021 to be Special Prosecutor for this case. He declined.

Next Willis witness was her father, another lawyer, former Black Panther member, world traveler, saw Covid coming back in 2019 while living in South Africa (he got booted out of SA, for some "political" reason) and was dazzling himself with his own brilliance. Apple didn't fall far from that tree, humility doesn't run in that family, apparently. He moved in with Fani (after being kicked out of SA) late summer of 2019 and Fani was bofing some DJ named "Deuce" that he met and knew about only because he was living with her. (Fani and her father don't talk much apparently.) Never met Wade until 2023.

Dad also testified that about a month after Fani was sworn in as Fulton County DA, their home was vandalized, people were gathered outside, hurling racial epithets and making threats. He claimed the police were called often and that he called them yet zero police reports of those calls were never produced (hmm). So he was heavily into playing the race card. Said "it was a black thing" to hoard cash. (It's more of a Great Depression thing when so many banks failed but whatever.) He also confirmed that he had seen Wade's testimony and his daughter's from the day before.

Now let's go back to the fact that Mr. Floyd is a lawyer who knows what a sequestration order for witnesses is. He's know he was being called as a witness, at the very latest, by Monday of this week but probably earlier than that. So his violation of the sequestration order was very blatant, nor did he appear to care much. Blamed the media saying he couldn't watch the news, read his newspapers, nor view his feeds without seeing it. Well, hello! That's exactly what a sequestration order instructs a witness to do. Avoid those.

Lunch recess and then the main show, Terrance Bradley, Wade's former law "partner" (they were pretty loose with their definitions on what constitutes a law partnership, but I digress.) Bradley's whole testimony is overshadowed by the attorney client privilege because he was Wade's lawyer on the divorce. Judge lets Merchant et. al. to proceed with Fani's team able to object on privilege grounds on a question by question basis.

Then the real fun for today started. Fani's lawyers were objecting to nearly every question even before defense counsel had completed it. (There's some backstory to this I can provide in a separate post if you request) For hours Bradley is on the stand, hemming, hawing, letting counsel argue it out before the judge but in general remaining mum about what he knew about Fani and Wade under the cloaking device known as attorney client privilege. He tap danced like Gregory Hines but he never gave up Wade nor Willis. Even the judge was getting tired of that and ruled he would conduct an in camera ex parte review of the issues about attorney client privilege and then rule after. Defense was okay with that because the judge would then see all of the texts, emails, etc. that Bradley had provided to Merchant.

Then the questionin turned to when and why Bradley had left the firm in 2022. There was a "disagreement" between him and Wade. Said disagreement was "assessed" to be under the attorney client privilege for Wade's divorce case...by Bradley. Judge had no reason to question that at the time so he went along with Bradley on that issue. Multiple defense counsel tried different approaches but to no avail.

Then, drumroll please, Fani's lead lawyer Anna Cross stands up to cross Bradley. BOOM! She asks him if the reason he was forced out of the firm with Wade because he was accused of sexually assaulting an employee of the firm. Assault, not harrassment. Anna Cross in a few questions, blew up his law license, his current practice, maybe his family life. The judge is shocked and non-plussed. he asks Cross a kind of WTF? question and she calmly replies, "He lied."

I know, TLDR but you asked.


Excellent summary.

Bonus - have old timey soap opera organ music playing in the background while reading it. Makes it much more entertaining.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Excellent summary.

Bonus - have old timey soap opera organ music playing in the background while reading it. Makes it much more entertaining.
Background on this is very entertaining too.

When that useless male member of Willis' team whined, "She didn't give us her cell phone! She only said she would!" WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH.
oysterbayAG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
My take on this so far is that the Judge is thinking and agonizing that if he allows the trial to go forward with Willis and Wade, he will be tortured extensively, since Wade, Willis and Bradley appear to be corrupt beyond belief. Mike Roman makes a living digging up dirt as an Opposition Researcher, his lawyers know everything ! These two days are only the tip of the iceberg.
aggiejayrod
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

aggiejayrod said:

aggiehawg said:

Quote:

And they closed without even trying to discredit Yeartle? Wow
The judge was in shock and fumbled around for awhile trying to figure out how to handle this hearing now.

I heard him say once that he could reopen the evidence at a later date if he deems it necessary to get further info from Bradley. I must have missed the part about Yeartie. What was Fani's lawyer going to accuse her of? Being on drugs? A lousy worker while in Fani's employ (which they have already suggested) or something even worse? Cheating on her husband?

I mean there is impeachment of credibility evidence and then there is what happened to Bradley, a Howitzer shot.


I didn't listen to her testimony but I believe Yeartle confirmed the whole relationship started before Fani and Wade claim it did. You'd think the State would want to impeach her credibility even a little bit. Something like "she's claiming that because she's mad at her former friend firing her"
I did listen to her zoom testimony. She wa suncomfortable (maybe afraid?) but she was clear in her answers. She answered yes or no nearly everytime. Let me say, yes that is sign of a well prepped witness BUT it is also a sign of witness that is very confident in her answers. She knows what she knows. She got drawn into this against her will but she's not going to lie to protect Fani.

So I'm assuming it's safe to say that my assumption is accurate that she confirmed the relationship long before Fani and wade lied and said it started?
aggiejayrod
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

Quote:

Excellent summary.

Bonus - have old timey soap opera organ music playing in the background while reading it. Makes it much more entertaining.
Background on this is very entertaining too.

When that useless male member of Willis' team whined, "She didn't give us her cell phone! She only said she would!" WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH.


That exchange made him look soooooooooooooooooooooooo weak.
"I offered to hand it to you but it's my only phone. I can offer to hand it to you again if you want"
If it were me I would have also used the whacking off motion while saying that

I'm curious what else they looked through on her phone. Not a great move on her part even if it was flopping her member out on the prosecutor's table
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiejayrod said:

aggiehawg said:

Quote:

Excellent summary.

Bonus - have old timey soap opera organ music playing in the background while reading it. Makes it much more entertaining.
Background on this is very entertaining too.

When that useless male member of Willis' team whined, "She didn't give us her cell phone! She only said she would!" WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH.


That exchange made him look soooooooooooooooooooooooo weak.
"I offered to hand it to you but it's my only phone. I can offer to hand it to you again if you want"
If it were me I would have also used the whacking off motion while saying that

I'm curious what else they looked through on her phone. Not a great move on her part even if it was flopping her member out on the prosecutor's table
Okay. Let's go thorugh this. Judge asked id Merchant would give her question of Bradley in advance. She did. Fani's lawyers did not object to any. She offered them her only phone to verify for themselves she was not making this up. They declined and called her a liar anyway.
aggiejayrod
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

aggiejayrod said:

aggiehawg said:

Quote:

Excellent summary.

Bonus - have old timey soap opera organ music playing in the background while reading it. Makes it much more entertaining.
Background on this is very entertaining too.

When that useless male member of Willis' team whined, "She didn't give us her cell phone! She only said she would!" WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH.


That exchange made him look soooooooooooooooooooooooo weak.
"I offered to hand it to you but it's my only phone. I can offer to hand it to you again if you want"
If it were me I would have also used the whacking off motion while saying that

I'm curious what else they looked through on her phone. Not a great move on her part even if it was flopping her member out on the prosecutor's table
Okay. Let's go thorugh this. Judge asked id Merchant would give her question of Bradley in advance. She did. Fani's lawyers did not object to any. She offered them her only phone to verify for themselves she was not making this up. They declined and called her a liar anyway.


She did hand the phone over to the state after his hissy fit. That's when they scrolled through her phone and she couldn't find her place when she got back to questioning Bradley
AggieAL1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Why wouldn't Cross impeach Bradley and brand him a liar if she could? Bradley was Merchant's witness and apparently it was information he provided Merchant that was at issue.

As far as Bradley being "away" when due to testify, he remained under Merchant's subpoena and it was up to her to keep him available.
aggiejayrod
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AggieAL1 said:

Why wouldn't Cross impeach Bradley and brand him a liar if she could? Bradley was Merchant's witness and apparently it was information he provided Merchant that was at issue.

As far as Bradley being "away" when due to testify, he remained under Merchant's subpoena and it was up to her to keep him available.


Because the way they did it was objectively a dick move. And Bradley did nothing to hurt the State's case when he could have burned their case to the ground but stuck with asserting attorney-client privilege. If the State did nothing, Bradley leaves the stand with a mostly forgettable testimony.

Now the State poked the bear. Bradley could testify that the DA's office threatened to push for his debarment if he testified against them. There's enough testimony around it.
GAP76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Nothing will change. Do you have confidence in the judge? Trump is in trouble because Wills and Wade will still be on the case….
45-70Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PA24
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Globalist will win, it is over.

Republicans…
MarkTwain
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I thought the judge already looked like he knew how he's going to rule. He's got to go through the motions. The fact that the state didn't go after Robin Yeartie at all is telling. At the end of the day judge called the attorney-client privilege into doubt when the state essentially set the case on fire calling Bradley's credibility into question while defending Wade. This entire part of the trial with all the about cash stashes in homes, adultery and vacations to exotic locales, it's like this thing is some Bravo TV production.
“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience" - Mark Twain
Funky Winkerbean
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The rest of the world must be shocked at how inept and corrupt our legal system is. Mother Russia would be proud.
richardag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggiehawg said:

Agthatbuilds said:

Can someone explain to me like I'm a child what the hell is going on
….,,,,, (removed to save space)

I know, TLDR but you asked.
Thank you for the summary, explained a lot,
Among the latter, under pretence of governing they have divided their nations into two classes, wolves and sheep.”
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Edward Carrington, January 16, 1787
Tony Franklins Other Shoe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
For people paying attention, the duplicity in Fani's testimony is enough to raise extreme doubt about her validity. From boasting about making money at a great job and hardly working, then taking on this supposedly thankless DA job and earning money with her "blood, sweat, and tears" all the while traveling to NAPA, and cruises, and 10 hour long driving day trips.

Then there is the rest of the evidence presented. This really does stink worse than a bait stand on an August afternoon.

Person Not Capable of Pregnancy
Who?mikejones!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thank you. I just don't have the time to watch it Iuie, and trying to follow tbis soap opera with random updates is challenging.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Agthatbuilds said:

Thank you. I just don't have the time to watch it Iuie, and trying to follow tbis soap opera with random updates is challenging.
Even watching it live gets confusing since there are so many defendants with attorneys involved. The judge has a checklist he has to go through asking every lawyer if they have any questions before they pass the witness.

And there was about an hours worth of discussion on attorney client privilege yesterday. Frankly, they were getting so far into the weeds even my eyes got crossed. The subject was so hotly debated that's what made the bombshell so shocking. Fani's lawyer was going to the mat seemingly to protect Bradley from having to answer on attorney client grounds, she was helping him, or so it appeared.

Finally it is her turn to question him and she just kneecaps him right from the start. And she was haughty and hostile about it too. Flipped on a dime.

Truly a surreal moment. At the end of the day, the Trump defendants' counselors were smiling though.

No idea what happened at the in camera hearing, however.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

As a Black woman and working professional, I've never been a huge fan of affirmative action and the recent rise of critical theory, and diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives has only bolstered my resistance. While it may seem necessary to some in order to right the wrongs of the past, I can sum up why these measures are an unmitigated disaster for hard-working Black Americans in two words:

Fani Willis.
Quote:

Willis is the prosecutor in one of the nation's major cities and most high profile cases against former President Donald Trump. Her position and the historic nature of the case she is prosecuting put her in an elite class most Black people will never even dream of reaching. One would expect such a person to be polished and classy, and able to remain so even while responding to an uncomfortable barrage of questions on the witness stand.

Instead, what we got was a defiant, childish, sour woman who spoke with the sophistication of teenage girl at her first college party.
Quote:

It wasn't simply that she sounded angryshe also sounded stupid.


Quote:

As I watched her testimony with my husband, an unspoken dread passed between us, weighted by a certain type of sadness. We understood instinctively that we were watching result of a diversity-first system that ends up elevating the weak while simultaneously besmirching the strong.

Willis is an elected official, but to even be in a position to run for one of the highest offices in her state means she has passed through elite job after elite job. She has received degrees, awards, and accolades.

How on earth, then, does such an "accomplished" woman sound like a freshman college student while participating in the trial of the century? Her foul demeanor and childish expressions only serve to magnify the grotesque consequences diversity hiring has for Black America in general.
Okay, this is over the top.

Quote:

Every time someone like me seeks professional advancement, I am forced to wonder how many people in the room think I shouldn't be there before I've even opened my mouth. I will have to swallow offenses I should really be battling, because I must battle not only my professional challengers, but the specter of the "angry, defiant black woman" who only got her job because she's not white. Many of my colleagues will look at any complaint I have as frivolous and rooted in entitlement. I must be my best, and then be even better than my best, because of the pathetic expectations Willis and her counterparts have sown on behalf of the rest of us.

We will forever be forced to carry Fani Willis on our backs into every professional situation.
LINK
AggieAL1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggiehawg said:

Agthatbuilds said:

Thank you. I just don't have the time to watch it Iuie, and trying to follow tbis soap opera with random updates is challenging.
Even watching it live gets confusing since there are so many defendants with attorneys involved. The judge has a checklist he has to go through asking every lawyer if they have any questions before they pass the witness.

And there was about an hours worth of discussion on attorney client privilege yesterday. Frankly, they were getting so far into the weeds even my eyes got crossed. The subject was so hotly debated that's what made the bombshell so shocking. Fani's lawyer was going to the mat seemingly to protect Bradley from having to answer on attorney client grounds, she was helping him, or so it appeared.

Finally it is her turn to question him and she just kneecaps him right from the start. And she was haughty and hostile about it too. Flipped on a dime.

Truly a surreal moment. At the end of the day, the Trump defendants' counselors were smiling though.

No idea what happened at the in camera hearing, however.
I suppose there are as many strategies as there are lawyers. But the general rules is this: In the event there is information that may be detrimental to your client, you first try to block its admission. If you have an argument of privilege, especially attorney/client prohibitions, you go all out on that.

When it appears you won't be able to forestall admission, turn to the next step: Discredit the information and/or its source. Cross' move seemed textbook.

aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Cross' move seemed textbook.
Except for that whole majorly pissing off the judge, part.
aggiejayrod
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiehawg said:

Quote:

Cross' move seemed textbook.
Except for that whole majorly pissing off the judge, part.


Textbook…tanking the case of the boss who treats her employees like crap
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.