Fani in more trouble - perjury possibly

[mspart]

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4485060-trump-investigator-offers-cell-phone-data-casting-doubt-on-fani-willis-relationship-timeline/

Trump investigator offers cellphone data casting doubt on Fani Willis relationship timeline

Special prosecutor Nathan Wade visited Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis (D) at her condo at least 35 times prior to when they claim their relationship began, according to an analysis of cellphone data compiled by an investigator working with former President Trump’s legal team.

The new document, filed Friday, raises questions about the veracity of Willis and Wade’s testimony regarding the timeline of their relationship.

“So, if phone records were to reflect that you were making phone calls from the same location as the condo before Nov. 1 of 2021, and it was on multiple occasions, the phone records would be wrong?” Trump attorney Steve Sadow asked Wade last week. 

“If phone records reflected that, yes, sir. They’d be wrong,” Wade said.

On Friday, Trump’s team filed with the court the report from its investigator, who said he used a tool called CellHawk to analyze Wade’s cellphone data for the first 11 months of 2021. Most of that window is before Wade’s contract to work for the district attorney’s office began, and it is entirely before when prosecutors claim their romance began. 

“This conservative analysis using the above referenced modality revealed a minimum of 35 occasions when Mr. Wade’s phone connected for an extended period to either one of those towers in closest proximity to the Dogwood address based upon associated data use, voice calls or text messages. The data reveals he is stationary and not in transit,” wrote Charles Mittelstadt, the investigator.

I would say that the phone records are not wrong.   They are facts and data.   A cell tower doesn't pick you up if you are not there.  And he apparently was there through the night, stationary as is said.   Yep, perjury is now on the table for these guys.   And to think this is all because of racism.   No one forced them to commit adultery, no one forced them to hire or get hired for huge money, no one forced them to lie about the relationship.  They did this on their own.   They lied in the affidavit and then in personal testimony.   The fact they did this is not racist.   The fact this is being brought into the light of day is not racist.   It is because they were stupid supposedly thinking they were above the law.  

mspart

[Wrestleknownothing]

50 minutes ago, mspart said:

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4485060-trump-investigator-offers-cell-phone-data-casting-doubt-on-fani-willis-relationship-timeline/

Trump investigator offers cellphone data casting doubt on Fani Willis relationship timeline

Special prosecutor Nathan Wade visited Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis (D) at her condo at least 35 times prior to when they claim their relationship began, according to an analysis of cellphone data compiled by an investigator working with former President Trump’s legal team.

The new document, filed Friday, raises questions about the veracity of Willis and Wade’s testimony regarding the timeline of their relationship.

“So, if phone records were to reflect that you were making phone calls from the same location as the condo before Nov. 1 of 2021, and it was on multiple occasions, the phone records would be wrong?” Trump attorney Steve Sadow asked Wade last week. 

“If phone records reflected that, yes, sir. They’d be wrong,” Wade said.

On Friday, Trump’s team filed with the court the report from its investigator, who said he used a tool called CellHawk to analyze Wade’s cellphone data for the first 11 months of 2021. Most of that window is before Wade’s contract to work for the district attorney’s office began, and it is entirely before when prosecutors claim their romance began. 

“This conservative analysis using the above referenced modality revealed a minimum of 35 occasions when Mr. Wade’s phone connected for an extended period to either one of those towers in closest proximity to the Dogwood address based upon associated data use, voice calls or text messages. The data reveals he is stationary and not in transit,” wrote Charles Mittelstadt, the investigator.

I would say that the phone records are not wrong.   They are facts and data.   A cell tower doesn't pick you up if you are not there.  And he apparently was there through the night, stationary as is said.   Yep, perjury is now on the table for these guys.   And to think this is all because of racism.   No one forced them to commit adultery, no one forced them to hire or get hired for huge money, no one forced them to lie about the relationship.  They did this on their own.   They lied in the affidavit and then in personal testimony.   The fact they did this is not racist.   The fact this is being brought into the light of day is not racist.   It is because they were stupid supposedly thinking they were above the law.  

mspart

If we take the statements about the filing at face value, without yet examining the actual filing, or hearing a rebuttal of the conclusions, isn't "he was in her condo" just a possible reason? Presumably if he is in any building in proximity to the tower it will result in him hitting that tower. Without knowing more, it is more likely that he is in any other location that hits that tower than in the one specific location of her condo. That presumes that her condo is not the only location that hits the tower.

Now, not having followed this part of the case at all, what difference does it make if they were smashing it? Serious question.

[mspart]

That is a correct assumption I guess.   But then it would be up to Wade to identify what building he was in, and remained stationary in overnight.   To me this could get really ugly.   If the accusation is true, they should just fess up rather than make this a huge issue and then face the consequences.   I think there is ample evidence and reasonable suspicion that if Wade was in the vicinity multiple times and Fani was in the vicinity at those same times, it would not be unreasonable to conclude they were together.   I agree that might not be the case, but the odds are very high that it is the case based on what we know about their relationship and actual testimony in the hearing from her former friend that the affair started before they said it did.   Hoping against hope that what has been established as an affair, and that they were in the same proximity twenty some times before they said they were together, you are not in the strong logical position.   I agree it could be Wade was visiting somewhere else, even overnight.   But that would be highly unlikely given the nature of their affair and the testimony that said it started before they admit.   The facts show they were in the same proximity.   Now it will be up to them to admit, or for the lawyers to find people nearby that can identify them as together.   The lawyers are probably already searching out those in proximity to her location to verify they were together.  So they can admit it if it is true, or they should fight it if not true.   And if not true, there won't be any corroborating witnesses.   But at the risk of perjury, they will have to decide the next move.   It is not looking good for them. 

mspart

[Wrestleknownothing]

26 minutes ago, mspart said:

That is a correct assumption I guess.   But then it would be up to Wade to identify what building he was in, and remained stationary in overnight.   To me this could get really ugly.   If the accusation is true, they should just fess up rather than make this a huge issue and then face the consequences.   I think there is ample evidence and reasonable suspicion that if Wade was in the vicinity multiple times and Fani was in the vicinity at those same times, it would not be unreasonable to conclude they were together.   I agree that might not be the case, but the odds are very high that it is the case based on what we know about their relationship and actual testimony in the hearing from her former friend that the affair started before they said it did.   Hoping against hope that what has been established as an affair, and that they were in the same proximity twenty some times before they said they were together, you are not in the strong logical position.   I agree it could be Wade was visiting somewhere else, even overnight.   But that would be highly unlikely given the nature of their affair and the testimony that said it started before they admit.   The facts show they were in the same proximity.   Now it will be up to them to admit, or for the lawyers to find people nearby that can identify them as together.   The lawyers are probably already searching out those in proximity to her location to verify they were together.  So they can admit it if it is true, or they should fight it if not true.   And if not true, there won't be any corroborating witnesses.   But at the risk of perjury, they will have to decide the next move.   It is not looking good for them. 

mspart

I am still unclear on why it matters.

[mspart]

Of course you are.   I'll spell it out for you.

1.   DA and prosecuting attorney have most likely perjured themselves regarding an affair they were having. 

2.  It is corrupt to hire a lover, pay him huge salary, and be taken on vacation by said lover, and meals paid for by said lover.   She is sharing in his largesse.   The fact that outside counsel is retained is normal and expected.   But not  if they are having an affair where there is a reasonable expectation of sharing the largesse.

3.  The trial they are prosecuting is now suspect due to the corrupt nature of their relationship.   Was she actually prosecuting or did the whole thing hatch as a way to enrich the participants Fani and Wade?

4.  This raises the cloud of corruption over the whole trial.  

5.  The judge overseeing the trial has determined that this matters whether you think so or not.   It is not standard procedure for this kind of relationship in a prosecuting or defense law team. 

6.  I'm sure there are more.   I'm tired of writing.   None of this will convince you.   The justice of their cause is too high to be in question you will reason.   This is just a side note not worth bothering about.   But there are plenty of law types, including the judge, who would disagree with you.  

mspart

[JimmyBT]

16 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I am still unclear on why it matters.

Where I come from lying under oath matters.   

[Wrestleknownothing]

4 minutes ago, JimmyBT said:

Where I come from lying under oath matters.   

I get that part. What I do not get is why the start date of their affair matters.

[JimmyBT]

It’s starts the timeline on how long he may have been paying her (trips, meals etc…).   Which led to him getting him a job that he really wasn’t qualified for. 

[Wrestleknownothing]

18 minutes ago, JimmyBT said:

It’s starts the timeline on how long he may have been paying her (trips, meals etc…).   Which led to him getting him a job that he really wasn’t qualified for. 

Ok. Lets say he is not qualified for the job. Then the evidence he produced would be faulty. So all you need to do is attack the evidence, like in a real trial, instead of waving a shiny object at the easily distracted to say "don't examine the evidence, examine the people who discovered the evidence". 

[JimmyBT]

12 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Ok. Lets say he is not qualified for the job. Then the evidence he produced would be faulty. So all you need to do is attack the evidence, like in a real trial, instead of waving a shiny object at the easily distracted to say "don't examine the evidence, examine the people who discovered the evidence". 

You examine the money (trail) he gave her to get the job.  She was basically being paid to give him the job.  With money and well you know (tail).   Once you’ve established that the rest is all taint(ed). 

Edited February 24 by JimmyBT

[Offthemat]

1 hour ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Ok. Lets say he is not qualified for the job. Then the evidence he produced would be faulty. So all you need to do is attack the evidence, like in a real trial, instead of waving a shiny object at the easily distracted to say "don't examine the evidence, examine the people who discovered the evidence". 

Do you know nothing about corruption?  There is a whole litany of laws and rules that officers of the court must abide to avoid even the slightest hint of corruption, and testimony, records, and evidence have shown that fat fanny and Nathan Wade have participated in, and lied under oath, about acts that would cause their disqualification from the case.  Or worse.  

[JimmyBT]

That job had to be something he really wanted to plow that big  field. 

[Offthemat]

The hearing continues now:

https://www.nbcnews.com/video/watch-live-fulton-county-hearing-on-misconduct-allegations-against-da-fani-willis-205006917712

[Offthemat]

“Do you normally tell lies about your friends?”  “Maybe.”

[mspart]

This is a circus.  

mspart

[ionel]

I can't tell you the exact date.

But I didn't ask you the exact date.

But I can't tell you the exact date.

But ...

[Offthemat]

12 minutes ago, mspart said:

This is a circus.  

mspart

Lawyers under oath squirm like worms. 

[Paul158]

25 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

Lawyers under oath squirm like worms. 

If he changed his story from the first hearing, would it be perjury?

[Offthemat]

1 minute ago, Paul158 said:

If he changed his story from the first hearing, would it be perjury?

Yes. 

[mspart]

You know, when you lie you have to remember exactly what the lie was.   When there are too many because you are an untrustworthy person, you can't keep up and you see what happened today. 

It should be so embarrassing that they are caught up in this corruption scandal due to their own acts.   This could have all been avoided if they had just not.   Be professionals and just don't.   The boss should not be having sex with the employee.   When did they not hear this?   And she is the DA, she should know this.   But it was disregarded because it couldn't be applied to them.  This is a cut and dried case of appearance of corruption and that can't have a place in the justice system.   Everything has to be above board.   They are giving Fani way too much credit on this, trying to prove that this does not have the appearance of corruption.   Well it does and that is that.

mspart

[Offthemat]

9 minutes ago, mspart said:

You know, when you lie you have to remember exactly what the lie was.   When there are too many because you are an untrustworthy person, you can't keep up and you see what happened today. 

It should be so embarrassing that they are caught up in this corruption scandal due to their own acts.   This could have all been avoided if they had just not.   Be professionals and just don't.   The boss should not be having sex with the employee.   When did they not hear this?   And she is the DA, she should know this.   But it was disregarded because it couldn't be applied to them.  This is a cut and dried case of appearance of corruption and that can't have a place in the justice system.   Everything has to be above board.   They are giving Fani way too much credit on this, trying to prove that this does not have the appearance of corruption.   Well it does and that is that.

mspart

There’s some speculation that her next job will be on “The View.”

[ionel]

57 minutes ago, mspart said:

 The boss should not be having sex with the employee.   When did they not hear this?  

[Offthemat]

48 minutes ago, ionel said:

Do you have one for “I did not have a relationship with that emasculated black man?”

[ionel]

3 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

Do you have one for “I did not have a relationship with that emasculated black man?”

Sure:

[Offthemat]

5 minutes ago, ionel said:

Sure:

Janet Reno?