Fani Farkle's Day in Court

[ElKabong]

Originally Posted by tucker6

I guess you and I saw different testimony today. I saw an extremely evasive attorney pretending that he had Forrest Gump's IQ and Joe Biden's memory. I don't think that was lost on the judge. Several times when the attorneys kept at him, the judge would say, "you made you point".

The judge is certainly going to take both attorneys off the case, but this may be one of those situations where you have to be careful what you wish for. The new people will obviously be smarter and better than this crew of prosecuters.

100% agree

[mostpost]

There was always going to be only one outcome to this case. Trump’s team has nothing. Absolutely nothing. The lawyers will be lucky if they don’t face sanctions.

[ElKabong]

Originally Posted by mostpost

There was always going to be only one outcome to this case. Trump’s team has nothing. Absolutely nothing. The lawyers will be lucky if they don’t face sanctions.

Let me get this straight. You think TRUMP 'S lawyers will face sanctions??

[Tom]

Originally Posted by mostpost

There was always going to be only one outcome to this case. Trump’s team has nothing. Absolutely nothing. The lawyers will be lucky if they don’t face sanctions.

In another thread, you whined about what you have to put with here.Posts like this arecwhy.

As you sow, so shall you reap.

Wallow in it.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by tucker6

I guess you and I saw different testimony today. I saw an extremely evasive attorney pretending that he had Forrest Gump's IQ and Joe Biden's memory. I don't think that was lost on the judge. Several times when the attorneys kept at him, the judge would say, "you made you point".

The judge is certainly going to take both attorneys off the case, but this may be one of those situations where you have to be careful what you wish for. The new people will obviously be smarter and better than this crew of prosecutors.

You might be right-and in a fair world you would be. But I just saw another untruthful, recalcitrant witness tiptoe successfully through a poorly laid minefield. However obvious that Bradley was lying, the defense fell far short of proving it.

Surely Merchant and her cohorts expected him to yield more. For god's sake, the dude didn't even expend enough syllables to perjure himself or much help get Willis recused.

Then again, maybe my naivete about the process had me expecting the sort of "Perry Mason" moment that doesn't materialize in real courtrooms.

I am curious about what degree of candor is customary behind closed doors. Much is unclear here. Does the judge know if Bradley knows if Wade and Willis were lying? And if so, how could he permit the man to so incessantly plead absence of memory? And would it have been legal and appropriate for the judge to have counseled (coached?) Bradley on how to avoid perjuring himself? If I'm Bradley my main concern is to not get sanctions slapped on MYself. Loyalty and friendship take a backseat. And I'd bet big money he consulted the judge at length on that in chambers.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by mountainman

You might be right-and in a fair world you would be. But I just saw another untruthful, recalcitrant witness tiptoe successfully through a poorly laid minefield. However obvious that Bradley was lying, the defense fell far short of proving it.

Surely Merchant and her cohorts expected him to yield more. For god's sake, the dude didn't even expend enough syllables to perjure himself or much help get Willis recused.

Then again, maybe my naivete about the process had me expecting the sort of "Perry Mason" moment that doesn't materialize in real courtrooms.

I am curious about what degree of candor is customary behind closed doors. Much is unclear here. Does the judge know if Bradley knows if Wade and Willis were lying? And if so, how could he permit the man to so incessantly plead absence of memory? And would it have been legal and appropriate for the judge to have counseled (coached?) Bradley on how to avoid perjuring himself? If I'm Bradley my main concern is to not get sanctions slapped on MYself. Loyalty and friendship take a backseat. And I'd bet big money he consulted the judge at length on that in chambers.

Bradley is the exact reason no one likes attorneys. They are all weasels. This case is making the USA look like laughingstocks around the world, and in particular black attorneys. They have called four black attorneys to date and all four lied and evaded the whole time. No honor whatsoever.

The crazy thing is that Bradley did not understand what the limits of attorney-client privilege were.

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Bradley is the exact reason no one likes attorneys. They are all weasels. This case is making the USA look like laughingstocks around the world, and in particular black attorneys. They have called four black attorneys to date and all four lied and evaded the whole time. No honor whatsoever.

The crazy thing is that Bradley did not understand what the limits of attorney-client privilege were.

Welcome to Atlanta

[davew]

Originally Posted by mostpost

There was always going to be only one outcome to this case. Trump’s team has nothing. Absolutely nothing. The lawyers will be lucky if they don’t face sanctions.

What will be the outcome, for those of us who do not watch Rachel Maddow.



Which lawyers will receive sanctions and why?

[ElKabong]

Originally Posted by mostpost

There was always going to be only one outcome to this case. Trump’s team has nothing. Absolutely nothing. The lawyers will be lucky if they don’t face sanctions.

Texts from Trump lawyers show Bradley was lying on the stand. This is evidence on record. Explains why the judge allowed the questioning to go on.

Who might face sanctions now??

You remind me of governor Lapetamayne in Blazing Saddles.

https://nypost.com/2024/02/29/us-new...willis-affair/

[davew]

How can you determine he was lying on the stand and not to Ashleigh Merchant during the previous month with their text mesages?

[Tom]

I would say the standard of simply "appearence of improprirty" has easily been met.

[ElKabong]

Originally Posted by davew

How can you determine he was lying on the stand and not to Ashleigh Merchant during the previous month with their text mesages?

https://youtu.be/YyqhzwVYjEU?si=P8m0RZxDw8H7Qed1

"Well dang" says Bradley when on the stand confronted with the text messages he sent.

Start at the 16 minute mark for the testimony in question. The whole show is worth the listen. Early in the clip the damning text messages are listed, more later on

[ElKabong]

Minute 29, GA state lege has subpoenaed these text messages. Fanni, and maybe willis and Bradley is/are now in deep shit.

[ElKabong]

Originally Posted by mountainman

Surely Merchant and her cohorts expected him to yield more. For god's sake, the dude didn't even expend enough syllables to perjure himself or much help get Willis recused.


.

What we know today ( Kelly's podcast obtaining the texts between Trump's attorney Merchant, and Bradley) Bradley's text of Willis and Wade being intimate prior to the dates Willis and Wade testified to under oath, corroborated with Yourti's dateline in her testimony. The texts in question by Bradley were clear, concise and damning to willis

Until the texts were made public, this all looked like a circus for Trump's lawyers. Now the judge has the texts and can put the "I don't know shit" testimony in correct perspective

https://youtube.com/shorts/UnmG6yJ26...4bVIq1-4_yw2Kv

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by ElKabong

Minute 29, GA state lege has subpoenaed these text messages. Fanni, and maybe willis and Bradley is/are now in deep shit.

Here’s a rundown

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/miacat...texts-n2635858

I think ole boy will be in serious trouble in da future