PA24 said:

---

captkirk said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Judge Overseeing Trump’s Georgia Case Donated To Fani Willis Campaign Prior To Appointment from @katesrichardson https://t.co/vzjMsBd9bs

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) February 21, 2024

Well, isn't that just peachy?

---

He worked for her in the past, which is even more of a conflict

---

Georgia is as backwoods as it gets.

---

Foreverconservative said:

---

Well it looks like the in-camera hearing with the Judge and Bradley, has been set for Monday, Feb. 26 so this one is in a holding pattern

---

Quote:

---

A special prosecutor in the Georgia election interference case involving former President Trump on Thursday objected to a judge's plan to question his former attorney behind closed doors about the timeline of his relationship with Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis (D).

Special prosecutor Nathan Wade said Thursday that his ex-attorney and former law partner, Terrence Bradley, should not be subject to a private questioning by Judge Scott McAfee which may "unlawfully compel" the lawyer to break attorney-client privilege.

---

Quote:

---

During the hearing, Bradley invoked attorney-client privilege and said he could not speak to Wade's relationship without putting his law license at risk. He said he began representing Wade in December 2018, ahead of the special prosecutor's divorce proceedings.

"Nothing under Georgia law authorizes the Court to conduct such an examination once the determination has been made that attorney-client privilege applies, and should the Court compel the disclosure anyway, it would vitiate one of the oldest and most fundamental privileges recognized both at common law and by statute," Wade's lawyers wrote in the Thursday court filing.

---

Quote:

---

Wade argued Thursday that lawyers for the defendants, including Trump, were given "broad leeway to pry into (his) private life" and used that time to introduce "intrusive and legally irrelevant personal details." And still, they provided no "credible evidence" he or Willis should be disqualified from the case, he said.

---

Quote:

---

For the judge to now question Bradley, despite the privilege invoked, would be "a step too far," Wade's lawyers said.

"The Court should not conduct the examination under any circumstance," the lawyers wrote, bolding and underlining the text.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Must be talking about this.

Quote:

---

A special prosecutor in the Georgia election interference case involving former President Trump on Thursday objected to a judge's plan to question his former attorney behind closed doors about the timeline of his relationship with Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis (D).

Special prosecutor Nathan Wade said Thursday that his ex-attorney and former law partner, Terrence Bradley, should not be subject to a private questioning by Judge Scott McAfee which may "unlawfully compel" the lawyer to break attorney-client privilege.

---

Quote:

---

During the hearing, Bradley invoked attorney-client privilege and said he could not speak to Wade's relationship without putting his law license at risk. He said he began representing Wade in December 2018, ahead of the special prosecutor's divorce proceedings.

"Nothing under Georgia law authorizes the Court to conduct such an examination once the determination has been made that attorney-client privilege applies, and should the Court compel the disclosure anyway, it would vitiate one of the oldest and most fundamental privileges recognized both at common law and by statute," Wade's lawyers wrote in the Thursday court filing.

---

Quote:

---

Wade argued Thursday that lawyers for the defendants, including Trump, were given "broad leeway to pry into (his) private life" and used that time to introduce "intrusive and legally irrelevant personal details." And still, they provided no "credible evidence" he or Willis should be disqualified from the case, he said.

---

Quote:

---

For the judge to now question Bradley, despite the privilege invoked, would be "a step too far," Wade's lawyers said.

"The Court should not conduct the examination under any circumstance," the lawyers wrote, bolding and underlining the text.

---

LINK

---

Foreverconservative said:

---

Those texts must be damning and will throw Fani and Willis to the wolves.

---

JFABNRGR said:

---

I wonder if anything additional would come out in the phone records. I think this is one of the pieces of evidence judge agreed to allow further discussion about since documents were only received I believe day 1 of hearings.

I doubt text messages are available but multiple calls at 2AM or of significant frequency starting before appointment could be harmful to wade & willis.

---

Foreverconservative said:

---

Strange in the latest filing Wade is claiming privilege all the way back to 2015??? I could swear his attorney said he was retained in 2020 or 2021

Just like when Wade kept saying he was divorced in 2015 multiple times and when called out then changed his language to the marriage was unfixable but they stayed together until the kids graduated.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Foreverconservative said:

---

Strange in the latest filing Wade is claiming privilege all the way back to 2015??? I could swear his attorney said he was retained in 2020 or 2021

Just like when Wade kept saying he was divorced in 2015 multiple times and when called out then changed his language to the marriage was unfixable but they stayed together until the kids graduated.

---

It took six years to actually file for divorce? They thing about the kids makes a little sense due topotential child support obligations and perhaps some spousal support. Guess Wade did the math on that and decided to wait?

IIRC, Bradley was unclear of the year and gave a range of 2015-2016 when he was retained.

But trying to tell the judge that he cannot hold an in camera review is not wise.

---

JFABNRGR said:

---

First in the hearing they throw Bradley under the bus and embarrass him after he protected them. Now they call him up and say stick with the attorney client privilege we have your back.

If I am him I am burning it all down.....If not my hope is Merchant has found more damning evidence that is still admissible.

---

AggieAL1 said:

---

Bradley has testified he has no personal or independent knowledge of the affair. What he knows he gleaned from conversations with Wade. Nor has anyone produced physical evidence to counter the Wade-Willis version of their union.

So at best, Bradley's testimony to the judge would serve an impeachment function (he said/he said) and Bradley faces several minuses. One, his recall has been spotty and two, a motive for retribution has been established.

Mainly though, petitioners have offered almost zero evidence of the alleged misdeed they said disqualifies Willis -- that she started and extended a spurious or frivolous prosecution as a cover to hire her lover and pad his pay in order to crib a few trips and meals on the taxpayers' dime.

---

aggiejayrod said:

---

AggieAL1 said:

---

Bradley has testified he has no personal or independent knowledge of the affair. What he knows he gleaned from conversations with Wade. Nor has anyone produced physical evidence to counter the Wade-Willis version of their union.

So at best, Bradley's testimony to the judge would serve an impeachment function (he said/he said) and Bradley faces several minuses. One, his recall has been spotty and two, a motive for retribution has been established.

Mainly though, petitioners have offered almost zero evidence of the alleged misdeed they said disqualifies Willis -- that she started and extended a spurious or frivolous prosecution as a cover to hire her lover and pad his pay in order to crib a few trips and meals on the taxpayers' dime.

---

No. Bradley testified that any knowledge he had (one way or the other) would be covered by attorney client privilege. Then he testified that his leaving the firm was covered by attorney-client privilege. Then Cross blew that up when she attempted to show that Bradley left the firm because of a sexual assault claim against him.

You didn't get this before but maybe you'll get it now. Him lying about privilege means the judge doesn't believe his privilege claims

---

"November 29, 2021, Mr. Wade’s phone was pinging on the East Cobb towers near his residence and, following a call from Ms. Willis at 11:32 P.M., while the call continued, his phone left the East Cobb area just after midnight and arrived within the geofence located on the Dogwood… pic.twitter.com/h9JE8TtKF4

— Phil Holloway ✈️ (@PhilHollowayEsq) February 23, 2024

BREAKING 🚨🚨

Cellphone data raise questions about start of #FaniWillis - Wade affair

“cell data seems to contradict Wade’s testimony in which he said he visited Willis at her condo in Hapeville no more than 10 times before he was hired in November 2021” https://t.co/SwVqVJhZ75

— Phil Holloway ✈️ (@PhilHollowayEsq) February 23, 2024

Trump's attorneys have Special Prosecutor Nathan Wade's cell phone data -

At least 35 visits to Fani Willis's condo before the "relationship" started

2,000 calls and 12K texts between Wade/Willis in 2021.

Late night hook-ups after calls from Willis.

Bad news for Willis. pic.twitter.com/79ap5hf0ZO

— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) February 23, 2024

Quote:

---

Former DeKalb County District Attorney Robert James said the cellphone data raises questions.

"People could look at this and be suspicious," James said. "But in the court of law, you need proof. The real question is whether there was proof there was a romantic relationship and I don't think this proves there was. It just proves a relationship, which they've already acknowledged.

---

Stunning that Team Trump got their hands on this in the #FaniWillis case. More evidence that these two prosecutors lied, under oath. They’re looking at perjury charges and worse. Discipline from the Bar. And there is zero chance they can stay on this case. It’s DONE. https://t.co/kV1gpL0NUF

— Megyn Kelly (@megynkelly) February 23, 2024

aggiehawg said:

---

From that article.

Quote:

---

Former DeKalb County District Attorney Robert James said the cellphone data raises questions.

"People could look at this and be suspicious," James said. "But in the court of law, you need proof. The real question is whether there was proof there was a romantic relationship and I don't think this proves there was. It just proves a relationship, which they've already acknowledged.

---

Laugh/cry.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

From that article.

Quote:

---

Former DeKalb County District Attorney Robert James said the cellphone data raises questions.

"People could look at this and be suspicious," James said. "But in the court of law, you need proof. The real question is whether there was proof there was a romantic relationship and I don't think this proves there was. It just proves a relationship, which they've already acknowledged.

---

Laugh/cry.

---

Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:

---

Y'all are crazy, there are plenty of job interviews that happen over 4 hours from 11 PM to 3 AM at the potential boss' abode. 2nd interviews, third interviews, fourth interviews...it's just thorough vetting of **credentials** and such.

---

captkirk said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

From that article.

Quote:

---

Former DeKalb County District Attorney Robert James said the cellphone data raises questions.

"People could look at this and be suspicious," James said. "But in the court of law, you need proof. The real question is whether there was proof there was a romantic relationship and I don't think this proves there was. It just proves a relationship, which they've already acknowledged.

---

Laugh/cry.

---

Just slumber parties, if you will

---

Quote:

---

Techno Fog
@Techno_Fog

Trump's attorneys have Special Prosecutor Nathan Wade's cell phone data -

At least 35 visits to Fani Willis's condo before the "relationship" started

2,000 calls and 12K texts between Wade/Willis in 2021.

Late night hook-ups after calls from Willis.

Bad news for Willis.

---

Foreverconservative said:

---

I wondered last week when the defense attorneys just let Wade and Willis continue to ramble on yes and know answers. They were both in effect digging their own graves. The more details they fed into the lie the deeper the whole got. Now the Trump team springs the trap with hard data that contradicts their sworn testimony. McAfee will be thrilled with this filing.

Hawg I have a question

Wade's attorney evidently shared privileged texts with Merchant, because they were going to view he phone in camera too right?

My question is if he shared privileged info with Merchant that breaks the privilege protection correct?

---

Quote:

---

What do the records show? Ahem:

Quote:

---

The affidavit says Willis and Wade called each other more than 2,000 times during the first 11 months of 2021 and exchanged just less than 12,000 text messages.

---

Two thousand calls? Over a period of 334 days, that averages out to six calls a day. Add to that an average of 36 texts a day, and you don't just have a relationship; you have an obsession. This more resembles a high-school crush than an adult romance, or perhaps more like ... a RICO conspiracy.

---

will25u said:

---

If they lied to the court, you would think that would be a HUGE deal, right?

---