Jump to content

Balcones

Full Members
  • Posts

    613
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Balcones

  1. Did you listen to the first 2 minutes of his testimony? He clearly states he came to the DAs office to meet with Fani Willis and Nathan Wade. Why would Barnes need to meet with Wade if he was being offered the job?
  2. If you want to hire an attorney who has never tried a felony case, $250/ hr is probably a fair price.
  3. Are either of you public officials that are required to report their gifts? Are you being directly paid by a taxpayer funded contract with sole discretion for billing? If not, you are probably fine. Fair market rate? A quick google search shows Fulton County DA makes $110k a year. The assistant DAs make $90-100k. I realize Wade is more qualified than them, but he has been paid $700k to date on just this case.
  4. The conflict does not have to be between plaintiff and defendant. In this case, the conflict is internal to the DAs office. Willis chose her boyfriend to be the Special Prosecutor and receive the taxpayer funded contract (currently at ~$700k) and then benefited from that money in the form of trips, gifts, etc...
  5. Looks like she is an attorney at the Cobb County DAs office. What would make her not credible or reliable?
  6. Let’s get 2 and walk this bitch off
  7. Maybe going to re-debut Witt vs Aggy?
  8. You left out the part that this was updated on Jan 24, 2024, after the defense filed a motion to have Wade removed based on his interrogatory responses from May 2023. See page 3. Subsequently, Wade quickly settled this divorce case out of court days after these responses.
  9. I know the legal system is hard to understand for most.
  10. He didn't have to give an affirmative answer. He could have responded with some like, "Plaintiff objects to this rog because it is ambiguous and fails to identify the information sought with particularity to "marriage"....." This is what happens 99% of time. I assume he and his attorney did that on the December 2021 rogs, and subsequently, until it was ultimately ordered to give an affirmative response. That's how they finally answered in May 2023, "none".
  11. Sadly, just blew a 93 mph fastball by Gasparino
  12. Hew answered, “none”. There is nothing misleading about that answer. This is ONE example of the Special Prosecutor, against a President of The United States, lying under oath, to a court in Georgia. That matters.
  13. Page 2. Black and White. https://www.fultonclerk.org/DocumentCenter/View/4025/93-MOTION-02-13-2024
  14. You’ve been given plenty. You asked for proof of is lying on rogs (up to present) and I have given you video and excerpts from lawfare.
  15. Take, for example, a May 2023 interrogatory that asked Wade to disclose any sexual relations he had during his marriage, including during the “time of separation” and “up to the present.” In his interrogatory response at that time, Wade answered “none.” But on the stand last week, Wade acknowledged that he had engaged in sexual relations with Willis by May 2023. In explaining his response to the interrogatory, Wade maintained that his marriage was “irretrievably broken” in 2015 and, as such, he did not have a relationship with anyone during the course of his marriage. But that explanation does not account for the fact that the interrogatory asked for conduct during the “time of separation” and “up to the present.” As one Georgia family law attorney told us: “Wade’s ‘definition’ of the end of his marriage being when it was irretrievably broken years ago is legal bullshit.” There are similar problems with other interrogatories in the divorce proceedings. In the May 2023 interrogatory, for example, Wade was asked to identify “any and all” occasions in which he entertained a member of the opposite sex “from date of marriage to the present.” Wade again answered “none.” Confronted with this interrogatory by defense counsel last week, Wade agreed that he had “entertained” Willis in May 2023. But he insisted on a strained interpretation of the question posed, claiming that he did not entertain anyone during the “course of the marriage”—a qualifying phrase that appears nowhere in the question or Wade’s response.
  16. You are checkers man, I can tell. As soon as she asked that question and he gave an answer, he opened the door for the defense to subpoena his business tax records. And his answers under oath, will be cross with the tax records.
×
×
  • Create New...