tequila4kapp said:
concordtom said:
tequila4kapp said:
Maybe it's because of my law background but the Georgia hearing was absolutely fascinating viewing.
Totally.
I thought he was weak and she was fantastic!
I listened to both Fox and msnbc talking heads. The worst take was Martha McCollum who claimed they were living an extravagant lifestyle (come on now - people go on vacations, that was a stretch big time) and that Wade was "one of her boyfriends (another stretch and slant - there was NO evidence that she had any more than ONE boyfriend.) That angered me because it's flat out character assassination.
That said, until Fani came in I thought they were sunk.
The best take was on msnbc where someone said "the onus is on the trump lawyers to prove there is evidence to support the allegation. They didn't do that, an allegation is not evidence."Meanwhile, Fani answered one "you have no evidence you paid by cash?" question by saying "one person's testimony is acceptable as evidence." And her testimony along with Wade's beats the Trump team's lack of evidence.
The only option for the judge is to simply say "you're lying".
Sure, it sounds far fetched.
But even if he paid for more than his share of dinners, I'm not bothered by it. She as DA had to hire someone to take on the case. She knows him, trusts him, and he apparently was paid less than many others who do similar work.
The trump lawyers want to turn it into more than I think it is. We all heard the problematic trump-Raffensburg call. He's guilty, somebody needs to prosecute him! She's taken on that mission and hired someone she thinks can do it. I dunno if he's the best pick, but I say carry on!
It was highly entertaining. A good lesson on American jurisprudence no matter what side anyone is on.
That one cuts both ways. Yeartie's testimony is equal evidence against Willis/Wade's claim. There are a lot of Wade/Willis claims that are … interesting. I think there's enough meat on the bones for both sides that the judge could plausibly rule either way. Considering the state hasn't questioned Willis yet being "tied" probably means they are ahead.
Notice how Willis was on a tirade during questioning by the first attorney. That attorney was either shrewdly letting Willis discredit herself by being out of control or she couldn't control the witness via questioning skills. I think the latter. Notice how attorney #2 put an end to Willis' shenanigans.
The part where the states attorney were objecting to Willis testifying then she stormed in the courtroom pissed off and insisted on testifying was Perry Mason-esquire.
Oh, good point about the Yeartie testimony. I forgot about that. But, that was not quite as strong. All she said was "hugging and kissing". I suppose the Trump lawyers could call her back in and ask to be more specific - and she may very well do so now that Fani dropped the hammer by saying on stand that yeartie is no longer a friend, and something as if Yeartie totally betrayed her. Cat fight situation Trump lawyers should seek to exploit.
I read last night that trump lawyers had another source who was alleged to testify to the same but that ended up not being as strong of testimony so they backed off bringing him/her in.
….I suppose if one were inclined to believe in Conspiracy Theory there's ample opportunity here.
1: Fani and Wade conspired to lie about the repayment with cash story. And about when they began the intimate relationship. And they silenced witnesses other than Yeartie.
Or
2. Other side, one could imagine that team trump has paid for Yeartie testimony. I mean, I'd believe ANYTHING about team trump - they tried a COUP for God's sake !!!!!! Only thing we haven't seen are political assassination, but those may be coming as everything escalates. Pretty surprised none yet, right? But I digress…
Willis WAS on fire when she first appeared, but im not as bothered by it as you are. I think that was natural. Who wouldn't be pissed!
I thought it was certainly dramatic! But I ultimately thought she was effective.
If this was a criminal trial, I'd think the judge would have cut down on her explanatory answers and made her look worse. But as it was, she told her narrative, and implausible as the cash story may have been, it kind of worked! I mean, Yeartie didn't oppose that. And that is the heart of the case!!! The case is not about whether they had relations - that's not illegal! In Georgia, a married couple can be lawyers on opposite sides of a case! So, who cares if Yeartie is right.
Like I said before, this is, I believe, much ado about pretty much nothing. Big deal if they used their wages to go on a cruise to the Caribbean or a 50 bday party to Belize. Team Trump wants to make that a crime?? Oh, good god! This is absurd.
Fani being upset that her love life bring dragged out and the most important case being threatened and her entire reputation being drawn through the mud? Yeah. I'd be upset, too. She kicked ass in her defense.
We've never seen anything like this, have we?? Starts in 30 minutes. I'm up!!
The history of the world depends on which credit card was used! Unbelievable!!
