Fani Willis hearing live

[Beachnutt]

https://www.youtube.com/live/MiALhJ-bz9I?feature=shared

[TwilightZone]

3. "I do not have knowledge of it starting, or when it started," Terrence Bradley said Tuesday"

Wasn't the whole point of this hearing, according to the defense, that Bradley knew when the relationship started?

[Sympthsical]

4. Woof

This is rough.

Bradley clearly doesn't want to say a word. The judge is making sure this is by the book as far as what the defendant's attorney is trying to manage.

And Bradley looks awful no matter how you slice it.

[Funtatlaguy]

6. It shouldn't matter when their relationship started. This sucks.

[Sympthsical]

7. Unfortunately it does

They testified to it under oath. If this goes south, they dug the hole.

[spooky3]

18. It's irrelevant to whether Willis has a conflict that adversely affects

TFG. If she were to lie about liking dogs or cats more, what difference does that make?

The judge has allowed far too much irrelevant questioning throughout. He should have told the parties to focus on the conflict standard. This has delayed the proceedings and allowed the defense to harm a dedicated public servant—and the public interest.

This is not simply my view; Katie Phang, Jill Wine Banks, and many other attorneys have been critical of the proceedings.

[Sympthsical]

21. I could cherry pick lawyers who see it oppositely

The fact of the matter is, they had a relationship they hid. The defense wanted to know the date for enrichment/conflict/kickback questions.

It would've been dirt simple if they'd been upfront with everything. Terrence Bradley was in the background the whole time whispering into Merchant's ear. That's what's spilling out right now in real time. He was chattering chattering chattering away.

Once that start date, under oath, became a question, it started unraveling into this.

That's the hazard of tugging threads.

[TwilightZone]

22. He seems to have no clue when it started, though.

I thought that was the whole point of him testifying again.

[Sympthsical]

26. He only needs to know one thing

Did he know it began before what Wade and Willis testified to? Merchant is just throwing everything he said to her in private right in his face right now. She brought all the receipts of their conversations. Because he clearly had a lot to say about a relationship existing well before what W/W said under oath.

The question before the judge - and I don't envy it - is where is Bradley lying? Did he lie to Merchant? Is he lying now about having no idea about anything? And I don't think anyone is buying all these "I don't recalls".

Merchant is salting the earth under him right now.

[TwilightZone]

37. And he doesn't seem to know that one thing.

Now, anyway. He's clearly an unreliable witness, but unless the defense can prove it with specifics - and determine when the relationship started - I'm not sure what the judge can do with all that.

Unless I'm missing something, the things he said to Merchant previously were pretty vague. He now says no one told him when it started and he was just speculating before. The defense may not have as much as they thought they did going in. Actually, that seems really obvious.

[Sympthsical]

46. Depends on the threshhold

This isn't a trial with a beyond a reasonable doubt standard.

I've heard a lot of different standards of where this needs to go for the judge to make up his mind, but I don't even want to offer options, because I'm not knowledgeable enough to even speculate.

[TwilightZone]

59. Considering that the judge called this just so that Bradley could testify...

the fact that his testimony is all over the place, combined with his history with Wade, etc., would give me pause to take any of Bradley's testimony at face value. But then, I'm not running the show.

[Sympthsical]

65. I think the judge wanted to get the fact Bradley was blabbing out there

Because this is the first time we're hearing the sheer amount of shit he was telling Merchant. A little of it came out at the first hearing, but then they cut it all off under privilege.

Bradley's remarks are so absurdly extensive. Is it all a lie? I would love to be a fly on the wall of the judge's chambers.

[Demsrule86]

55. The area on the GPS is in an area where both have friends, there are bars etc. It doesn't matter and as a woman

I am displeased even more with the right.

[Sympthsical]

57. We'll see

Because Willis' filing was a strong objection. Not ironclad - evidence can be brought in to prove lying on the stand without advanced notice. But I dunno. It's late in the process for this, and there are problems with having an "expert" running around like this.

I genuinely have no idea what the judge will do about the cell phone stuff.

There's no jury here, and the standard isn't reasonable doubt. It just matters what the judge thinks about all this. And it's messssssy.

[madaboutharry]

5. The defense attorney is speaking in a rather high pitched voice today!

Seems like a hostile witness!

What a clown show.

[Lovie777]

12. Are you kidding me?................................

he does not know when, that's a simple answer.

Defense is out of line, but what else is new.

[madaboutharry]

16. We don't disagree.

It is clear he doesn’t want to be there.

[MOMFUDSKI]

8. Defense attorney looking like a neophyte.

Proceed please

[bluestarone]

9. Doesn't happen to me very often but

I'm To nervous to watch this.

[cilla4progress]

10. High-tech lynching

...

[MOMFUDSKI]

41. I see a white, blonde woman all over a

black man and it is upsetting. Shades of the South.

[cilla4progress]

42. Totally.

About sex between two other Black people.

No further comment because I'm too pissed

[walkingman]

11. The blonde lady is obnoxious - my guess is she is a deplorable.

[Funtatlaguy]

15. As a white former Georgian, I'd almost guarantee you that.

[FarPoint]

19. who does she represent?

All these Court cases make me dizzy...so I ask...

[MichMan]

70. Michael Roman

[hlthe2b]

20. She definitely is that. But, I think it is meant to cover for an obvious lack of competency.

[MichMan]

69. At the beginning of the hearing a couple weeks ago, she said she had been involved in one of Wade's election campaigns.

[walkingman]

77. Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. 😎

[jmellman]

13. What an absolutely terrible judge -- why is he even allowing this?????

Sheesh

[regnaD kciN]

24. The bad news...

…is that this is the same judge who will be presiding over the trial.

If there’s a trial, that is.

[walkingman]

25. I'm not a lawyer but she leads the witness on almost every question?

Where you state what your position is and then ask "correct" - is that not leading?

[Sympthsical]

28. You can if the witness is "adverse" or "hostile"

You have to ask the judge permission to do it. But once a witness is considered adverse or hostile, you can ask leading questions.

[walkingman]

33. Thanks....very interesting

[cilla4progress]

73. Isn't Bradley

a defense witness?

Can he nevertheless be "adverse"?

[Sympthsical]

76. This was addressed in the first hearing

And I forget the exact wording the judge ruled. But it was, more or less, accepted that Bradley's interests were in not helping the defense. He planned to invoke privilege and answer nothing.

[JohnSJ]

14. It is pretty obvious they are on a fishing expedition, and the judge seems to be bending over

backwards giving the trumpers every benefit of the doubt.

[Pachamama]

17. The Divorce Lawyer for Nathan Wade is an absolute idiot

Its painful to listen to this.....

[cilla4progress]

27. How did they get him to violate

Attorney client privilege ffs

[Happy Hoosier]

45. They didn't...

... the judge reviewed some elements and determined that answering some of this questions, at least, is not covered by privilege.

[cilla4progress]

79. I see.

Thanks.

Given what GA law says about divorce.(as I've only briefly scanned in media reports), I would think the start date of an extramarital affair would be privileged?

https://mtlawoffice.com/news/adultery-and-its-impact-on-a-georgia-divorce#:~:text=In%20Georgia%2C%20adultery%20can%20impact,despite%20the%20parties'%20financial%20circumstances

[Sympthsical]

23. Merchant got where she needed to go

It was a rough start, but she finally got there, where all this is just coming rushing out now.

This is INSANE. Think about how insane this is:

Bradley was feeding information to Roman's lawyers the whole time. All of this, about the relationship, the trips, etc. etc. He offered that information up to the Trump/Roman team. Happily. And he was correcting them to make sure they got all the dirt.

That's how this all started. With Bradley. And that's why he has been trying so hard to say nothing. His career in Atlanta is finished.

Now, how does this affect the case? Who can say? Bradley's been lying his ass off all over the place, clearly. How credible is he? If he and Wade had a falling out, then he clearly had an axe to grind. What kind of axe? Was he really just waiting for the opportunity to level Wade?

This is completely insane.

[senseandsensibility]

29. Thanks for the recap

Sounds bad,

[gab13by13]

30. Can/should Wade do a rebuttal to Bradley?

[Sympthsical]

36. I don't believe so

He's no longer under subpoena. That's why he's allowed to sit there in court like that.

Merchant objected to Wade being there, and the judge said it wasn't a problem because he's not under subpoena and that Wade isn't going to be called to the stand again in any of this.

[Leghorn21]

31. Big thanks for your concise explanation here, Sympthsical!!!

I do try to keep up, but...well, I ain't great at it!!

Your post here is most appreciated!!

[Lovie777]

32. Sounds like he is an unreliable witness...................

How much was he paid.

[Sympthsical]

38. It sounds like - but don't quote me

That he offered up all this information of his own volition.

That sounds like axe to grind to me. But somehow - in a feat of miraculous stupidity - he didn't think it would ever come out that he was the source of all the dirt being fed to Merchant. He really thought no one would know it was him.

And once it came out that it was him, that's when he started clamming up and claiming privilege.

He played himself.

[MOMFUDSKI]

43. All to protect the orange clown.

Shit

[Patton French]

44. Why in the world would Bradley feed info to Roman's lawyers?

Did he have some sort of falling out with Wade? I can’t believe it has come to this.

[Sympthsical]

47. He was dropped from their firm after sexual assault allegations

There's a lot to work with there.

[Patton French]

48. Good grief. Thanks. NT

[Jarqui]

66. I think his original response to the defense lawyer was vindictive

There were 2 sexual assaults
One alleged by an employee
Another alleged by a client who the prosecution had ready to testify

Wade dealt with it and ended their firms relationship with the alleged

I think he was bitter when the defense attorney called
I also don't see why Wade shouldn't sue him silly for breaking attorney client privilege.

This alleged sexual assaulter and a woman Fani terminated for not working well for the DA office are the only two who have testified for the defense alleging Fani & Wade were having a fling before 1st qtr 2022.

This guy has now bowed out with speculating.

The only thing left of significance are the phone records.
I have not heard the details on them yet.

[mchill]

53. Wade fired Bradley for

Some sort of sexual assault is what was asked about (maybe that question was overruled). Clearly he is protecting Wade (or himself?) now, BUT

Why does it matter??? It seems like they’d have to prove some more corrupt motive related to the RICO case and I’m not seeing it.

[gab13by13]

67. I don't think it all started with Bradley

I think it started with Roman and Merchant colluding with Wade's ex-wife. Didn't she reopen their divorce settlement?

Roman got Bradley to say things that could be documented that insinuated that the relationship with Fani started earlier.

Who the hell would hire Bradley? Merchant manipulated him IMO.

[cilla4progress]

81. Prosecutors will get to this

on cross?

I'm assuming they have a shot at him?

[Sympthsical]

87. They absolutely will

We're still doing the Parade of Defense lawyers.

The DA attorneys are going to have a lot to say, no doubt.

[toesonthenose]

88. No cross. Damn, this is not good at all. F@%k Drumpf!

[Sympthsical]

90. I'm surprised!

They must feel they have everything they need from all that.

Maybe they don't want to risk opening another can of worms. It was the DA's cross of Bradley last time that allowed for today to happen.

[toesonthenose]

100. I have a feeling they didn't want to open up anything else.

He didn't do too well today, and I saw a few moments of body english from the judge that I didn't like. I have a not so great feeling after today. Friday the judge will decide on these new cell phone/location records and if they can be entered in as evidence. This whole thing reminds me of Whitewater investigation by Ken Starr and the twisted path it took so far from the original subject of the investigation.

[Sympthsical]

102. My "uh oh" moment

When Merchant asked Bradley about what Wade had told him about meetings at her office (alleged rendevouz).

Bradley just sat and stared. And stared. And stared.

They re-asked the question three times, and he just stared some more.

Right after that came the garage door opener question - which is an odd and highly specific detail.

And if you looked at the judge during that line of questioning, he was writing furiously.

[nolabear]

34. I've been watching for ten minutes and have learned nothing.

The witness is just meandering, the tech isn’t working, and I can’t tell who’s who. Is the Zoom lawyer prosecution or defense?

[Sympthsical]

39. Zoom lawyer is Sadow

Trump's lawyer.

The woman in the tan suit is Merchant, Roman's lawyer.

[Nictuku]

35. Isn't this from the hearings last week?

[Ms. Toad]

78. Nope. This is live today.

Bradley refused to testify last week claiming attorney-client privilege. The judge ruled that at least parts of it were not covered by privilege, so he was ordered to testify today to those parts.

[angrychair]

40. Let me be clear

You would be hard pressed to make me recall a conversation I had this morning, much less specific details and dates of a conversation I had with someone 3 years ago.
I would find those questions to be absurd.

[elocs]

49. Willis said in her 2020 campaign that she wouldn't date anyone who worked under her.

Did she really mean that or did she have her fingers crossed? Because if she had only did as she said she would do, then none of this would be happening now. Not dating someone who worked under her would have avoided even the appearance of wrong-doing.
Now she is dealing with the consequences of her choice.

[MichMan]

51. She has since said that statement was specific to employees

Since Wade is not an employee, it isn't relevant

[cilla4progress]

60. Yes,

he was a contractor.

[elocs]

64. "Since said" is qualified hair splitting & when you find you need to use that, then you have problems.

She would have been far better of had she stuck with simply how her statement would have been understood by the voters and I bet it is relevant to many of them.

[SKKY]

50. I really hate to say this, but based on what I'm hearing....

....unless Fani Willis' attorneys can prove he's lying, the Atlanta case is kaput.

[angrychair]

52. Feel like my head is going explode

Every damn time some bullshit screws it all up.
Willis let us down. This was irresponsible on her part and incredibly unprofessional.

[SKKY]

58. I mean it doesn't change the fact of the case against Trump...

...but the optics play right into their hands. I agree, very irresponsible of Willis if everything I'm hearing is true.

[angrychair]

63. I'm not a lawyer

But I would assume that the best case scenario at this point is the county would have to start over with a completely new team and Willis would be recused from participating.
I just guessing though as I'm not a lawyer

[SKKY]

75. That's what I've heard as well...

...if Willis gets taken off this case, no way this will happen before November.

[mchill]

56. Keep in my mind

If it actually mattered, people have different definitions of “relationships”. This is such a personal intrusion into someone’s personal life.

[JohnSJ]

74. Really? Have they met the Georgia criteria to disqualify her? I am not so sure

How did Willis and Wade benefit?

[mchill]

98. Supposed luxury trips

Geez, my brother takes his companion all over the world and pays everything, including Antartica. He can no longer drive and she drives him around to places. I don’t understand how a few trips can constitute something nefarious vis a vis this RICO case.

Now if they can determine Fani and Wade lied under oath, well that’s different, but imho why did this hearing even need to go there or for that matter, happen at all.

[JohnSJ]

101. I don't see a benefit either, and I don't see willfully lying either

[toesonthenose]

86. They aren't going to cross him...ugggg. Not good.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

95. Kaput?

I wonder if that means all the MAGAts that have already been indicted, convicted and sentenced will be free to go. Hm.

[SKKY]

106. No, it just means the trail of Trump will likely not happen before the election...

...in fact, it's almost impossible for it to happen if Willis is removed.

[dweller]

54. May I ask a question ?

I’m listening and $74k keeps getting mentioned
What s that about ?


✌🏻

[Ms. Toad]

82. Money split in the Wade-Bradley partnership.

I don't know all of the details, but Roman's attorney was inflating the amount of money Wade received from the AG office by allocating all of the money to Wade, not just the portion which Wade was entitled to. The $74,000 may be the portion going to Bradley.

[dweller]

89. Thank you

Bradley kept insisting that it was included in some motion so I wondered



✌🏻

[Ms. Toad]

93. There was a lot of talk in the last hearing

about how much money the state was paying Wade, and he kept responding that the money came to the firm and was split. They weren't specific this time about what they were talking about.

[malaise]

61. This witness has no effin credibility

That is all

[cilla4progress]

62. He's a defense witness, so,

their witness has no credibility.

I mean...

[Model35mech]

68. It seems he has trapped himself in previous statements.

He is not credible because of what appears to be previous interviews with the defense attorneys.

[Sympthsical]

71. Like an Attorney's Day Parade, this thing

[walkingman]

72. Wow, so far what I think I have seen is a cheap divorce lawyer ran his mouth

about his friend/client and now it is having major repercussions for Fanni Willis. Somebody is lying and I hope is is not Fanni Willis because I am sure these MAGA attorney's will try to do whatever it takes to get rid of the DA and throw the entire RICO case up in the air.

[Raven]

85. Bingo! You are absolutely correct. Bradley ran his mouth. He's a gossip. I think the Judge

will agree and find no credible evidence that Willis and Ward violated anything. I think the Judge gave these shit lawyers all the opportunities in the world to make their case, and they didn't. I think the Judge and everyone else has seen that Bradley is a crappy human being and not someone you would want to share a confidence with, but that's about it.

PS: I pray I'm right and not wishfully thinking.

[Think. Again.]

80. Is this Bradley guy the only source of...

...the allegation that Wade and Willis were in a full-blown relationship before the time they said they were?

He doesn't seem like a very credible witness, is it his word against theirs?

[Sympthsical]

83. There is also Yeardley

Fani Willis' friend whose condo she was living in (the condo that's involved in the cell phone stuff). She testified it began earlier. But she also may have credibility problems. She was forced to resign from the DA's office.

[Ms. Toad]

84. A disgruntled ex-employee of Willis did, as well. n/t

[mchill]

99. So two less than credible witnesses for defense

One fired by Fani and one fired by Wade.

[intrepidity]

91. I have barely been following this, but

Is what's happening have to do with Wade's divorce and the timing of his relationship with Willis? That is, that maybe W&W did not want their budding romance to be part of the divorce issues? Apologies if the timing is way off here, but it's the first thing that springs to mind when I hear that Wade's divorce lawyer has info on the topic. Anyone know?

[DaBronx]

92. I like the judge

I think he is fair.
I think the defense has not met the bar for anything.
The defense witness has a lot of issues, really caused a lot of problems.
But, all that provided nothing.
The only benefit is that Fani’s team has hopefully used this time wisely to better prepare for the actual trump trial. So they won’t miss a beat.

[spanone]

94. This is a ratfucking with TSF's fingerprints all over it

JMHO

[LetMyPeopleVote]

96. YIKES: Trump co-defendant's attorney caught with pants down on Zoom during hearing

Link to tweet

[LetMyPeopleVote]

97. YIKES: Trump co-defendant's attorney caught with pants down on Zoom during hearing

Link to tweet

[MichMan]

103. By the time the dust settles, I wonder who may end up potentially getting disbarred ?

Attorneys and other officers of the court are held to a much higher standard than other witnesses.

[Mike Nelson]

104. Judge me says...

... until they are legally MARRIED, the question of when the "relationship" began can't be determined. There can be friendships that turn on a moment. They could have dated on an off. One could have lied and said a dinner amounted to more. There can be a "one night stand" that never amounts to anything. There can be months of flirting, with NO physical contact...

... I would allow for a social media declaration a "Relationship" started, which many people have now as an engagement or trial marriage. This day would be the end of it, if I were the Judge.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

105. The judge is being too easy on the idiots pushing this motion

Link to tweet