Comments by "Walter Bailey" (@walterbailey2950) on "Trump's Lawyer Mercilessly Grills Nathan Wade's Divorce Attorney About Fani Willis Relationship" video.

Who cares? neither Wade nor his attorney is on trial
10
Well, your reaction is why we have people with legal training and procedures, instead of just a lynch mob
7
@GFlCh well, that’s a question that can be easily objected to if she did ask it that way calls for speculation. The proper answer is only a factual one as to what you know
7
@johnpalomino2618 they are not on trial, nor has it been proven that they lied. It is not the job of a criminal, defendant to try the prosecutor for any crime.
6
@joellenbroetzmann9053 why don’t you ask James Gilliar the guy who coined the phrase 10% for big guy about who the big guy is? He said it’s not who you think.
6
@rampage241 a trial would be a proceeding, where they could be convicted of a crime: such as the one that Trump is trying to avoid with this hearing
4
What does the relationship between two prosecutors have to do with the case that they’re prosecuting? Why are they even having this hearing?
2
That is not within the authority of the court. You can’t just decide you don’t like someone and make them pay a huge amount of money for revenge.
2
@burnthrust very difficult to prove perjury almost impossible when someone says they don’t know and don’t recall. You don’t have a good grasp of reality.
2
@awakenedangrycensoredameri4459 you have a Disturbed imagination.. but it’s just inside your head
2
@karoleegregerson7600 you have to prove perjury in court You can’t just decide that someone’s committed perjury
1
@adelitabriano4423 why is he even there? What does any of this have to do with the case?
1
Not sure where you’re getting that idea from? The hearing testimony that I saw left the defendants counsel with nothing and it’s still not clear why they’re even having this hearing what it could possibly have to do with the case.
1
@OffDaChayn well, he has two strikes against him. He’s a black person, and he’s not loyal to Trump above all things.
1
@deannaryle2104 seriously how could you possibly know anything about them?
1
@hannaj4032 yeah, you’re delusional if you think either one of those things is going to happen
1
@johnpalomino2618 Roy Cohn was also a lawyer-until he was disbarred. So are John Eastman, Kenneth Chesebro, Makes me think of a joke that my father, a retired attorney, and former prosecutor shared with me: It’s true that some lawyers are venal, amoral, ruthless buckets of toxic slime but it’s unfair to judge the entire profession by five or 600,000 bad apples. No one outside that group would consider helping a gangster like Donald Trump manipulate the law, in order to maneuver himself into a position to completely overthrow the rule of law that our republic is based on.
1
@dareneq1 we’re headed to a Stalinist secret police and the overthrow of the rule of law by a gangster. If a wealthy and powerful criminal can avoid being held accountable before the law by attacking prosecutors, the rule of law is definitely imperiled if not compromised.
1
@flynnlizzy5469 🤣😆🤣😆🤣
1
@MissJensk1 Why should their relationship be part of this trial at all? Georgia law allows for husband and wife to be opposing attorneys in court and they’re on the same side. There’s no evidence that this has had anything to do with Donald Trump or anything he’s accused of doing. There’s a real moral hazard to allowing a wealthy and powerful defendant to put the prosecution on trial and thereby Escape accountability before the law.
1
@MissJensk1 you should care if a wealthy and powerful defendant is able to avoid prosecution by using opposition research and putting his prosecutors on trial. But you’re sympathetic to a gangster who wants to be about the law and that’s why our legal system is imperiled that’s why our liberty is imperiled because laws are the foundation of liberty in a republic.
1
So you want attorneys who have a relationship with each other to be disbarred? basically want them to be disbarred for prosecuting Trump
1
@joeb259 I think it’s pretty clear that this has nothing to do with Donald Trump‘s case and equally clear that it’s opposition research in action. Trumps signature play taught him by Roy Cohn to put his accuser on trial. If there’s any question about them handling their funds. That’s a separate issue-to be addressed, if and when law-enforcement decides to investigate. it’s not the job of the defendant in this case to investigate the prosecutors. But, as a member of his cult I have no doubt that you will cheer for anything you can use against anyone who is against Trump the law principles, ethics, justice, truth, whatever be damned
1
@rrkunath oh, silly me I thought this was a hearing about a criminal prosecution of Donald Trump. You’re right this is really about the defendant, putting the prosecutors on trial or whatever he can pin on them. That’s how our justice system is supposed to work so that defendants don’t have to face the consequences of their actions. and you don’t have to be a billionaire to put the prosecution on trial and get out of most anything. Just read Roy Cohn
1
@littleme5378 he is a bit like Lance Ito out of his depth
1
@lefthandpath1587 ergo, we may as well just let gangsters overthrow the rule of law and run wild because it’s not fair to hold anyone accountable for their crimes if there are smart people who have nicer lives than me with power over me-right? “I’ll let a gangster be my champion, and I’ll even give him my last dollar to take vengeance against the people who have nicer lives than I do that. I resent so much.”
1
@michellegill1278 well, Donald Trump is a monster. I can’t blame anyone for being afraid of crossing him
1
@joehouses5097 if you’re sympathetic to trumps attempt to avoid the consequences of his actions by overthrowing the rule of law, and putting prosecutors on trial, or accept virtually anything that he says as truth you’re a no position to be talking about using critical thinking or judgment before just accepting lies that you hear🤷🏼‍♂️
1
@jg8464 Fulton county
1
@rrkunath oh, it’s unlikely to go to the Georgia bar. The judge can remove them from the case without a criminal conviction, but he can’t come victim of a crime from this hearing, and if they’re not convicted of a crime, the Georgia bar doesn’t have enough to act on.
1