Trump Georgia Case: New Witness Contradicts Nathan Wade’s Former Law Partner’s Testimony
WAIT! There’s more! Another witness “could also testify to multiple conversations she had with [Terrenace] Bradley that ‘directly’ contradicted his testimony on the witness stand.”
Former President Donald Trump’s Georgia case just keeps getting weirder!
A new witness has come forward with statement that contradict the testimony of Terrence Bradly, the former law partner of special prosecutor Nathan Wade.
Bradley contradicted himself on the stand!
I cannot keep up.
At first, Terrance Bradley claimed Willis and Wade began their relationship before 2022. But under oath, he said he was speculating.
Trump’s co-defendant Cathy Latham filed a notice about statements from Manny Arora, a former adjunct professor at Georgia State School of Law and board-certified in criminal law.
The filing said that Arora and Bradley spoke about the relationship between Fulton County DA Fani Willis and Wade between September and October 2023.
Arora claimed that Bradley told him:
1) Mr. Wade had definitely begun a romantic relationship with Ms. Willis during the time that Ms. Willis was running for District Attorney in 2019 through 2020;
2) After the election during Ms. Willis’ transition, she had Mr. wade supervise the transition including hiring and firing candidates after interviews; and
3) Mr. Bradley stated that he had personal knowledge of the relationship between Mr. wade and district Attorney Willis, including details regarding the use of Ms. Robin Yeartie’s apartment such as Ms. Wade’s having a garage opener to the property.
“Arora represented Trump co-defendant Kenneth Chesebro, who took a plea deal in October,” reported The Daily Caller.
On February 28, Bradley took the stand. He said, under oath, that “he couldn’t recall several details and timelines about conversations” he had with Wade about Willis.
Defense attorney Ashleigh Merchant at one point referenced text messages between her and Bradley in which she had asked Bradley if he thought the relationship started before Willis hired Wade in 2021. Bradley responded “absolutely” in the text exchange.
But in court Tuesday, Bradley said he was “speculating” in those comments.
It gets better. Another witness can say that Bradley didn’t tell the truth under oath:
Trump co-defendant David Shafer’s attorneys told Judge Scott McAfee Monday that Cindi Lee Yeager, co-chief deputy for the Cobb County District Attorney’s Office, could also testify to multiple conversations she had with Bradley that “directly” contradicted his testimony on the witness stand.
“Ms. Yeager watched Mr. Bradley’s testimony before the Court and became concerned as a result of the fact that what Mr. Bradley testified to on the witness stand was directly contrary to what Mr. Bradley had told Ms. Yeager in person,” the filing stated. (RELATED: Judge Indicates He Will Rule On Fani Willis Disqualification Within 2 Weeks)
Maybe Bradley shouldn’t contradict himself under oath.
"Ms. Yeager heard District Attorney #FaniWillis tell Mr. Bradley:
“They are coming after us. You don’t need to talk to them about anything about us.” pic.twitter.com/umEgiVQaNG
— Phil Holloway ✈️ (@PhilHollowayEsq) March 4, 2024
From in or around August of 2023 through January of 2024, Ms. Yeager had numerous, in-person and other conversations with attorney Terence Bradley in which information relating to District Attorney Willis and Mr. Wade was discussed”” pic.twitter.com/NmvGqy5eL4
— Phil Holloway ✈️ (@PhilHollowayEsq) March 4, 2024
🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨
“Mr. Wade had definitively begun a romantic relationship with Ms. Willis during the time that Ms. Willis was running for District Attorney in 2019 through 2020” pic.twitter.com/jGerSWoL9V
— Phil Holloway ✈️ (@PhilHollowayEsq) March 4, 2024
“Ms. Yeager heard District Attorney #FaniWillis tell Mr. Bradley:
“They are coming after us. You don’t need to talk to them about anything about us.” pic.twitter.com/umEgiVQaNG
— Phil Holloway ✈️ (@PhilHollowayEsq) March 4, 2024
“Ms. Yeager watched Mr. Bradley’s testimony before the Court and became concerned as a result of the fact that what Mr. Bradley testified to on the witness stand was directly contrary to what Mr. Bradley had told Ms. Yeager in person” pic.twitter.com/ow1E8ekqby
— Phil Holloway ✈️ (@PhilHollowayEsq) March 4, 2024
I cannot emphasize enough how significant this is.
The judge will be hard pressed to ignore the proposed testimony of another Georgia prosecutor who is coming forward to correct what she perceives as a fraud perpetrated on the court by Fulton DA #FaniWillis
— Phil Holloway ✈️ (@PhilHollowayEsq) March 4, 2024
As I told @megynkelly last week on the @MegynKellyShow
"The Truth Will Come Out"
— Phil Holloway ✈️ (@PhilHollowayEsq) March 4, 2024
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Oy. All 3 of them need to be removed immediately and disbarred for lying on the stand. This is one of the most serious things any attorney can do. The Judge should be furious and order them to stop any type of legal proceedings they are involved in. To make it even worse, Fanni said, on the stand, that cell phone tracking data could not be trusted. Every case she has ever worked on that used it will now be in question. What trash.
Bradley is not on the case. He is only the ex partner and ex lawyer of Wade. So he can’t be removed.
Fani never testified that cell phone records were not reliable. Her lawyers submitted the claim in a breif.
So what? She’s a liar. Case closed.
You can find tons of debates with students against Charlie Kirk, Matt Walsh and Michael Knowles. A lot of time they demolish the students because they get the details wrong.
It is important to get the details right.
Under oath in a court of law?
Also, Terrence Bradly should be disbarred.
Both statements , at this point, are hearsay attested to by the filing lawyers.
They may be in the process of getting affidavits, if they do then we’ll talk.
Assuming so then much of what Yeager says is hearsay coming from Bradley. Though, the Bradley volunteering details unsolicited is telling.
What is more important is Willis contacting Bradley, and Wade having Bradley file his documents. Perhaps because Wade want wanted plausible deniability wrt the documents.
With Arora, the most relevant aspect is that Wade was supervising personnel, that may force the judge to remove the whole office.
When you overhear two people having a conversation, that’s not hearsay. That’s direct evidence.
At this point all the judge has is what the lawyers say Yeager and Arora told them. That’s textbook hearsay. If they get affidavits, that will go away.
once they have affidavits overhearing the conversation becomes direct evidence. Until then …
Much of what Bradley told Yeager about the dating is hearsay, though may come in through exceptions to hearsay.
OK, I see what you’re saying.
New reality TV.
People deride Trump for starring in a reality show.
At least he wasn’t LIVING one.
It would take time to develop these witnesses, determine if they have something other than hearsay to contribute, and what new avenues will open up.
What I think it does open the door to is a few things:
1) courage in numbers – the people who were intimidated by Fani are coming out of the woodwork. There are more and this is a signal to the judge and others that there are more waiting in the wings
2) cover for the judge – he has what he needs to make a ruling, but he can use this to be slightly more aggressive.
With more evidence coming forward, he can make a judgment narrowly but recommend others to explore the implications and additional evidence more thoroughly
“I am ruling here on appearance of impropriety for the most part, but there is enough here to investigate further” … and let others decide what to do with this evidence
Once Dems splinter locally – and all politics is local – then key people are free to pile on.
If someone files to run against Fani, then you know Fani is cooked and even more will come out.
There is something else. Wade was probably gone before the evidentiary hearing. Willis was on the border. This is dragging the rest of prosecution to disqualification.
Scum of the Earth.
As if this was some sort of surprise …
Fanny Willis takes tons of lavish vacations during work with the boyfriend she hired and overpaid for a job he’s unqualified for. She took more time off than any normal working person … all during a time when she was supposed to be working on one of the most complex, consequential cases in US judicial history (and a completely bogus case from the very start, at that). She did all this with an IQ in the mid-80s, maybe low-90s … all while she was having sex with the employees, abusing office funds (even apart from funneling them to her boyfriend – which is something apart from any kickbacks she might have gotten from him), making a mockery of the judicial system, perjuring herself, making false accusations against innocent people …
This is a complete sh*tshow and they all should be in jail.
Further, Judge McAffee, himself, is an integral part of this illegal show-trial and I have little doubt that he knew a lot about all of this stuff, too – as I’m sure the rumor mill among Georgia prosecutors is pretty active and they all have known pretty much what was going on in Fulton County.
Our country is a complete joke. A sick joke. This time in history will go down much akin to Caligula’s rule in Rome … only worse. Pathetic.
Very accurate account. And she initiated a shit case as a grift with Bidens WH in an effort to disrupt the election. Hopefully they’ll let her deposit her stashed cash into the prison commissary account.
The power brokers of the democratic party and the doj found a group that they could manipulate, if the cases were to collapse they can simply wash their hands of can possible collusion.
The most interesting bit in this story isn’t that Bradley perjured himself. Anyone who watched 330 seconds of his testimony knew that.
The interesting part is the witness who alleges that Fani called him and attempted to influence him to not talk about what he knew, which would include not testifying.
I’m not a lawyer so I’ll ask the obvious: What’s the penalty for witness tampering in Georgia?
Ouch! What a place for a type. I meant that to say “anyone who watched 30 seconds of his testimony!”
I give up
Don’t despair!
We will have an edit button within 10 years.
Of course, that’s hearsay.
Speculation, according to Mr Bradley
I don’t recall discussing the details of this “edit button” you speak of.
My money is on not having an edit button before somebody invents a time machine, after which it will be moot.
I thought “330 seconds” was fine, to begin with. It had a uniqueness to it, along with still being true.
If they let Fani proceed with the case can these same transparency and financial issues be raised at trial?
I’m afraid that whatever the penalty is, it won’t matter. The chances of getting an indictment in that county with these defendants much less a conviction are very, very low. (I’m an ATL resident. What’s transpired in this case is indicative of how Fulton County courts have worked for decades).
I would think this would be handled by a different county in a different court to assure fairness. she knows all the judges, lawyers and prosecutors in Fulton.
Different prosecutors….same jury pool. It’s the jury pool that’s the problem.
I wonder if Trump has a federal section 1983 claim. Deprivation of rights under color of law.
I am not a lawyer, though I have been joined at the hip with more than I can count. I have also wondered about color of law, so I did some research about 6 months ago, it appears to me that this is among other things a color of law case. Maybe lawyers can weigh in on this. Also, it seems to me that this stuff has been organized and that it would fall under RICO statutes.
We shall soon see.
The Georgia Senate is holding hearings tomorrow on Fani.
The Georgia Bar is holding hearing on possible ethics violations Thursday.
It’s also as PrinectonAI said, now that they are not the first, a lot of people are starting to come oout of the wood works.
there is no penalty if no one is willing to suffer the wrath of applying it
To be clear, I’m pretty sure that Bradley was shading his testimony, and perhaps even committing perjury. But not in respect to this particular piece of testimony (emphasis added by me):
In other words, Ms. Merchant’s email query itself was asking for speculation, and Bradley’s email response could reasonably be interpreted as shorthand for “I absolutely thought so.”
What is important is the fact that his testimony changed. All of a sudden, he couldn’t recall a thing. There’s a reason for that and it doesn’t have anything to do with his memory. When we find out the reason, somebody is going to be in hot water.
Or it could have been taken for the shorthand, ” Absolutely it began at that point”….but then I’m speculating.
Perjury, witness tampering, obstruction, campaign finance and conspiracy. The Fulton County D.A.s office may not be fixable.
what would they be saying if Trump did any of this?
Orange Man bad?
Orange Man off the ballot.
Prison would fix it.
Dang!
About six months ago, I would have thought this whole sordid episode would be swept under the rug and the Trump case would go on rattling down the rails like a proper railroad. Now, I’ve got a fragment of hope that justice will actually come out of the justice department. I’ll believe it when Fanni is kicked out of her job and facing the bar, and this disaster of a case is dumped into the trash can like it deserves.
The thing is, none of these statements were under oath, so Bradley can just blow them all off and say he was speculating, or that he was lying to all those people, and he told the truth under oath. Nobody will believe him, but he can’t be charged without proving it.
Was this a true romance? I have read nothing about flowers, candy, soft lights, sweet music or champagne.
You know that anyone who is dishonest enough to persecute Trump has to be corrupt in just about everything they do.
Seeing that the Judge is incredibly reluctant to DQ these two diversity hires. Also seeing he now has a challenger from Jessi Jackson running against him.
Probably seals the case in their favour.
Dang!