Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MayflowerMadam
I think someone from the Wade/Willis side got to Bradley over the weekend and threatened him about remembering anything. Hence the questions about who he had talked to about the case (emphasis on "recently").

The problem for Bradley, Wade, and Willis is that there isn't a jury and the Judge is making mental notes of Bradley's forgetfulness and protests about his earlier text messages and emails (i.e., "I wuz focused only on the $74,000").

As loyal Leftie Katie Phang said on MSNBC late yesterday, "Why would Bradley lie knowing he's risking his law license?"

Why indeed?

IIRC, closing arguments are scheduled for this coming Friday. Bradley gave the defense plenty of ammo by failing to remember his texts and emails to Ashleigh Merchant and by once again trying to claim attorney/client privilege for some details. He impeached himself as a witness for Wade/Willis and gave credence to his earlier emails and texts.

As Bradley's earlier email/text said about the Wade/Willis affair starting before Wade was hired, "Absolutely." The Judge isn't a jury. "Absolutely" isn't something the judge is going to overlook.

My takeaway so far is that the Judge has plenty of support for a decision to disqualify Willis and Wade (at a minimum). The $64,000 question is whether or not he will cave to the same threats that Bradley got.

16 posted on 02/28/2024 3:26:51 AM PST by RoosterRedux (A person who seeks the truth with a closed mind will never find it. He will only confirm his bias.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: RoosterRedux

“Why would Bradley lie knowing he’s risking his law license?”

Katie Phang is retarded. Anyone would rather lose a license or certification if the other option is BEING MURDERED. Can’t they even recognize that?


21 posted on 02/28/2024 3:40:11 AM PST by MayflowerMadam (Fraud vitiates everything." - SCOTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: RoosterRedux

“...decision to disqualify...”
Then again, the judge could take the dusky road of the former head of the FBI, Crowley, and say, “Yes, some lying was done but obviously no ill-intent was meant so I refuse to act on this.”
He might remove Wade only. He might remove Wade and Willis and let the case go forward.
If he isn’t wed to a future in Fulton County, he might even do the right thing and toss the whole case in the dumpster where it belongs.


28 posted on 02/28/2024 4:49:17 AM PST by ArtDodger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: RoosterRedux

The DA’s office fired a shot across the bow at Bradley last week when they brought up the sexual assault/harassment issues out of the blue. The statute of limitations has not expired and he knows if he says the wrong thing, he could be looking at a criminal referral against him for sexual assault which could mean jail time.


69 posted on 02/28/2024 8:09:03 AM PST by XRdsRev (Justice for Bernell Trammell, Trump supporter, murdered in 2020)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: RoosterRedux
""I wuz focused only on the $74,000"

THIS! This is the actual We Wuz Kangs moment, not the text messages which unfortunately are barely admissable hearsay for construction, and borderline gossip anyway.

Why did no one connect the 74 grand from Wade to Bradley, and yet Bradley owed money to Wade just a short time later?!?

75 posted on 02/28/2024 9:09:29 AM PST by StAnDeliver (TrumpII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson