175
Weird, what's this guys motivation? And then why his change of tune? We're missing something key here
This article does feel a bit light on the details. I found this MSN article, which is an opinion piece, but lays out just who exactly all these people are and their relationships with each other.
It seems Bradley worked with Wade, but was fired for sexual harrassment. There is another person, Robin Yeartie, who was also let go from the DA's office. Both of them are the only 2 people saying Wade and Willis were dating before they made it public. Both have a potential grudge, worth slinging mud while not under oath, but since both were lawyers, now the reality of what perjuring themselves in a case this big would do to them seems to have hit home and they've developed amnesia.
Based upon his testimony throughout the evidentiary hearing, it seems Bradley decided to share gossip and innuendo that he had heard from other sources, none of which is attributable to Wade or Willis and, more importantly, at this juncture none of which has been confirmed to be true and accurate.
In fact, every defense attorney who took a run at Bradley during that hearing struck out. Bradley didn’t budge. He even admitted while on the stand that he might have told lies about Wade.
ETA: For anyone not reading the article, the text messages in the headline are not anything along the lines of proof showing they had a relationship, just Bradley ranting about how he was sure there was something, of which he has now changed his tune and says he may have overstated things, and these texts are now, I believe, are trying to be used by the Trump team to get Bradley to cooperate with them again.
Frankly, The Office did this whole dating impropriety thing much better...
I would guess that Roman's lawyer was particularly aggressive about finding dirt on the DA, and got in contact with this guy, who was happy to oblige (because he doesn't like the rest of them) until he realized he was about to hand Donald Trump a huge win. Might not be the best career move for him.
or he was about to have to perjure hisself so pissing hisself on the stand looked like a better deal
Probably money.
It's okay to not know something. You're not required to have an opinion on why something may have happened
I'm thinking he never thought his involvement would become public? Maybe he has some personal issue with Willis or positive relationship with someone on the other side but doesn't want it to be as career- and life-defining as publicly being the person who got Trump off the hook for his political interference.
Probably not being prosecuted for rape.
Their goal was delaying the trial via tangentially related hearsay, which they have succeeded in doing.
My only question is when are the Obstruction of Justice indictments being filed?
Never. Our justice system isn't serious unless you're a poor and/or minority
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Through the texts, Bradley fed Merchant information and made suggestions to help her prove that Willis had dated Nathan Wade, a special prosecutor hired for the election case.
On Tuesday, when the judge compelled him to testify after determining some of his communications with Wade weren’t privileged, he repeatedly said he didn’t know or couldn’t remember crucial details.
Merchant filed a motion Jan. 8 seeking to remove Willis and Wade and their offices from the election case and to toss out the indictment against Trump and 14 others.
A Fulton County grand jury in August indicted Trump and 18 others on charges related to their efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election in Georgia, won by President Joe Biden.
Early in the text exchanges, on Sept. 18, Merchant asked Bradley if he knew of anyone who would be willing to write a sworn statement on Willis and Wade’s relationship.
Merchant assured him before filing her motion that she had protected him “completely,” adding, “Not that you needed protection.” She said she planned to put Willis and Wade on the stand and was sending subpoenas to Bradley and others only as backup.
The original article contains 913 words, the summary contains 191 words. Saved 79%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2024
175 points (99.4% liked)
politics
18973 readers
3071 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS