The Benny Show - Benny Johnson - 🚨 PANIC: Judge READY To DISQUALIFY Big Fani LIVE | Taking The Stand! TRUMP Speaking In COURT NOW

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 15, 2024 - The Benny Show - Benny Johnson

06:21:27

🚨 PANIC: Judge READY To DISQUALIFY Big Fani LIVE | Taking The Stand! TRUMP Speaking In COURT NOW

Participants

Main voices

benny johnson

45:14

Appearances

donald j trump

04:00

Clips

karl rove

00:03

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Former President Trump now back in court today in New York City in a big way.
		The judge in that so-called hush money case against him expected to decide if his criminal trial will begin next month.
		If it does, in late March, it would be the first of Trump's four criminal cases to go to trial.
		Meanwhile, 900 miles to the south, the judge overseeing Trump's election interference case in Georgia will hear evidence concerning the Fulton County DA, that's Fannie Willis, in this alleged affair with the special prosecutor, Nathan Wade.
		A lot to go through all this with Steve Harrigan, live outside the courthouse there, Fulton County, Georgia, in the city of Atlanta.
		Steve, good morning.
		Good morning, Bill.
		We're expecting a real fight today with some high stakes, some jobs.
		Could be at risk, and the entire case against former President Trump here could be at risk as well.
		Both the district attorney and the prosecutor she hired have been accused of misconduct.
		A defense attorney says the two of them are lying about their admitted affair, both when it began and how it was funded.
		The judge could have his hands full today with some potentially salacious questions.
		My guess is that the judge will probably want to keep a tight rein on these proceedings.
		I don't anticipate a parade of dozens of witnesses coming through the courthouse in the days ahead.
		It's not clear that the DA, Fannie Willis, will be forced to testify.
		That really depends on what kind of information the earlier witnesses give.
		But the judge has already issued a stern warning.
		That even if there is the appearance of a conflict of interest, that could be enough to disqualify the district attorney.
		Bill, back to you.
		All right, Steve.
		Thank you.
		Watching Atlanta, watching New York twos.
		You're sitting with someone today that actually wants to make a difference because they deserve a DA that won't have sex with his employees.
		Later that same evening.
		Hello.
		Yeah.
		I'm here for the gangbang I'm here for the gang, babe.
		Okay, today is Thursday, February 15th, 2024.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Baby, we are live from New York, live in Atlanta.
		We got these cases ongoing.
		Trump is speaking.
		Nathan Wade is on the stand right now.
		Witnesses testify against Fannie Willis.
		Fannie's best friends are saying she is lying.
		This case is going down in flames.
		Trump is in New York as judge sets trial date and Trump is going blames on.
		He is speaking live to the press in moments.
		Tasha Kay joins the show.
		My name is Benny Johnson and this is The Benny Show.
		I want to go to Nathan Wade live on the stand right now.
		Here he is, ladies and gentlemen.
		Okay.
unidentified		2022 and 2023 is what I recall.
		That's what you recall?
		Yes.
		Okay.
		So you just don't remember if you traveled with her in 2021?
		2022 and 2023 is what I recall.
		Is what you recall.
		My question is, did you travel with her in 2021?
		I'm not recalling any travel in 2021.
		So it's not yes or no, you just don't remember?
		I'm not recalling any travel in 2021.
		So you did not travel with her in 2021?
		No, this has been covered.
		Let's keep going.
		Thank you.
		Let's see.
		You filed an affidavit in this case, correct?
		I did.
		Okay, and I marked that already.
		I gave it to the state as number one.
		Is it number one?
		May I approach the judge?
		Thank you.
		In that affidavit, you swore under oath, correct?
		Yes, ma 'am.
		And in that affidavit, you swore that...
		Well, first of all, do you recognize the affidavit?
		I do.
		Okay.
		Did you sign the affidavit under oath?
		I did.
		And you gave this affidavit specifically to refute the allegations that I had raised?
		Yes, ma 'am.
		Nobody forced you to sign this?
		No, ma 'am.
		You chose to sign it?
		I did.
		And you signed it on purpose to admit into court to refute allegations?
		I did.
		You signed it specifically to prove that you were not in a relationship with Willis prior to November 2021, correct?
		Correct.
		And you were a lawyer when you signed it?
		I was.
		And you're still a lawyer today, correct?
		I am.
		When were you barred?
		1999.
		And you believe that your relationship with Ms. Willis is subject to attorney-client privilege, correct?
		I'm going to object to that, Your Honor.
		I don't think that's actually correct.
		I don't think that's a relevant question, and I don't think it's appropriate to question this witness about the story of his attorney-client privilege.
		Dirty dog!
		All right, so a lot to unpack there.
		The question is simply, does he believe there's a relationship that exists in terms of attorney-client privilege between him and Ms. Willis?
		Is that accurate?
		It was.
		I asked if he believed his relationship with Ms. Willis is subject to attorney-client privilege.
		Okay, I don't see why yes or no would be barred.
		Maybe I'm not understanding the question.
		If the question is, does Mr. Wade and District Attorney Willis have an attorney-client relationship, there's no foundation for that.
		If the question to the witnesses, does his relationship with District Attorney Willis impact The first, I believe, is a proper phrasing.
		The second, I think there's been a representation that Mr. Wade preserves and doesn't waive anything, and so I think asking him particular questions in order to potentially backdoor a waiver is inappropriate, and that's my question.
		All right.
		If we're just trying to again assess.
	Where a privilege does or does not exist and we're not actually getting into it, I think we can establish those, you know, parameters.
	But, Ms. Merchant, can you rephrase the question based on that concern and we'll see where we are?
	Yes.
	Do you believe?
	You.
	That your relationship with Ms. Willis is subject to an attorney-client privilege.
	Not if you and Ms. Willis have one, but do you believe that that relationship is subject to one?
	I'm going to object to that question as it's phrased.
	In what context?
	Any conversation with his attorneys is privileged.
	That, I think, is clear.
	What's not clear to me from that...
	Dude, he's cut!
	He's cut!
	In the context of your communication with your attorneys, is that clear?
	Or outside that?
	Salt!
	Right.
	And Ms. Merchant, I think we need to figure out what are we getting at with this?
	I'm just trying to figure out if he thought that their relationship is subject to an attorney-client privilege.
	I mean, it's been asserted.
	I think it's going to be asserted.
	And that was all I was asking.
	I mean, the actions themselves wouldn't be an issue.
	It's more communications.
	Someone saw them.
	Someone had knowledge of it.
	Is that attorney-client privilege?
	I guess I would find a legal opinion on this.
	Is it relevant?
	We can deal with that as it comes up.
	So, sustained.
	In 2022, in this affidavit, you swore that you and Willis developed a personal relationship.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And you said that that didn't develop until 2022, correct?
	That's correct.
	And that's different from what you said in your pleading in May 2023, in the divorce case, correct?
	No, ma 'am.
	In May 2023, when you were asked if you had any affairs, essentially.
	And you said none.
	That's correct.
	So in May, you said you had not, in May 2023 in the divorce case, you said you had not had a personal relationship, an affair, a romantic relationship with anyone.
	That's correct.
	But you told this court in the affidavit that you did have one that started in 2022.
	So that would have been ongoing at 2023.
	So here I think there's a distinction, if you'd allow me to explain.
	the interrogatory question during the course of your marriage.
	Or to date.
	It actually says we're going to request at the Whitman's Day Committee.
	So, my marriage was irretrievably broken in 2015, ma 'am, by agreement.
	My wife and I agree that once she had the affair in 2015, that we'd get a divorce.
	We didn't get a divorce immediately.
	Because my children were still in school and I refused to allow them to grow up without their father at the time.
	So we waited.
	We waited until the youngest graduated and we dropped her off at college and didn't file for the divorce.
	So if you're asking me about the interrogatory as it relates to having the 2022 relationship with District Attorney Willis.
	I want to say, because my marriage was irretrievably broken, I was free to have a relationship.
	So the question, though, was if you had had a relationship.
	And in 2023, you said you did not.
	And that is different than what you said in this affidavit, correct?
	No, ma 'am.
	Liar!
	So in 2015, my marriage was irretrievably broken.
	So I did not have...
	A relationship with anyone during the course of my marriage.
	And in that interrogatory, they asked you if you had any receipts for travel with someone of the other sex up until the time you were answering.
	Is that correct?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And you said that you didn't.
	You've already testified to that earlier.
	But in this affidavit, you said you swore that you had travel expenses and shared expenses on travel with Ms. Willis.
	Again.
	During the course of my marriage, I had no relationship or receipts.
	I'm not asking about during the course of your marriage.
	I have no problem with him answering.
	As it relates to receipts today, I don't have any receipts, ma 'am.
	So you don't have any travel receipts available to you for any travel that you did with Ms. Wells?
	I don't have any receipts, no ma 'am.
	No receipts.
	So you used your business credit card for these trucks, correct?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Oh, man.
unidentified		I used a business credit card for everything.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Oh, man.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Oh, he's sweating!
unidentified		Yes, ma 'am.
		Used it for personal travel with Ms. Wallace?
		Yes, ma 'am.
		And you have receipts from those business credit cards that you have to file with your taxes, correct?
		No, ma 'am.
		No.
		I filed a statement.
		I turn over the statement and whatever is there on the statement, the accountant looks at it and the accountant says, okay, this is personal.
		It goes over here.
		This is business.
		It goes over here.
		Here are your taxes.
		So you have those statements.
		We'll call them statements instead of receipts.
		You have those statements, correct?
		I have the statements, yes ma 'am.
		But when you answered the interrogatory under oath, you said you did not have anything to show the records of travel with Ms. Willis.
		I answered the question.
		I had no receipts, ma 'am.
		You had no receipts, but you had statements.
		I ordered the statement, yes ma 'am.
		You did order the statement, okay.
		And so we're just talking to semantics between invoice and statements or receipt, I'm sorry.
		I'm not going to object, Your Honor, to the argumentative tone as a question.
		I believe it's an ask and answer.
		All right, sustain.
		In, let's see.
		You also in this affidavit said that no funds paid to you for compensation as your role as special counselor was shared with Willis, correct?
		That's correct.
		And that you never cohabitated with Willis, correct?
		That's correct.
		By cohabitation, does that mean that you never spent the night with Willis?
		I spent the night with her during travel.
		Okay.
		So I just want to qualify your term, your use of the term cohabitation.
		That means you didn't live together.
		That's correct.
		But you did spend the night together.
		Yes.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		He billed her all night!
unidentified		That's the subject of his affidavit, Judge.
		Right, but it might not be the subject of this hearing.
		So the question is the nature and extent of the relationship.
		And so if they just spent the night on a single occasion, I don't think we're going to...
		Document in detail every single time that happens.
		And I don't intend to do that, Judge, but I think what is relevant is when the relationship started.
		And that's what you indicated.
		Why don't we start with that question and go from there?
		And that's what I asked, when the first time he spent the night with her.
		That's what I asked.
		That's a different question, isn't it?
		Okay, so let's not talk about when you spent the night.
		When did your romantic relationship with Ms. Willis begin?
		2022.
		When?
		In 2022.
		Early 2022.
		So you were appointed in November of 2021?
		Yes, ma 'am.
		And your relationship started early.
		What's early?
		January?
		February?
		Around March.
		Around March.
		But you two met at an October 2019 judicial conference, correct?
		Yes, ma 'am.
		And describe your relationship at that point, then.
		Which point?
		2019.
		So...
		I was at a judicial conference to teach a course, if you will, to newer judges.
		I did that in 2019.
		As I was exiting the conference, another judge was standing outside who was a friend of mine.
		I stopped and exchanged peasantries with her.
		And standing, talking to her at the time was then Judge Willis.
		She introduced us at that time.
		We shook hands, exchanged business cards, and I got into my vehicle and left the conference.
		So that meeting was probably three minutes.
		When was the next time you talked to her?
		Didn't talk to her again.
		Probably...
		Maybe a month or a month and a half had gone by.
		Okay, so you talked to her November maybe?
		Maybe.
		On the phone?
		On the phone.
		Okay.
		How regularly did you speak with her in 2021 on the phone?
		In 2021?
		I'm sorry, 2019.
		I'm so sorry.
		2019.
		How frequently did you speak with her on the phone?
		2019, after the meeting, I probably talked to her.
		Two or three times.
		She would have questions.
		I was the district rep for the particular district that I sat in.
		And the judges, when they would have questions, they sometimes would go to the rep.
		So she was outside of my district, but she would call me.
		She felt comfortable calling me to ask me the questions.
		I don't know if you know the...
		The racial makeup of certain benches, but it wasn't very diverse.
		So she felt comfortable calling me for advice.
	And she did that.
	And we had also in common that she was starting a private law practice at the time, and I'd already had mine up and going.
	And we talked about balancing the demands of the bench with That private practice.
	So we didn't talk that often, but when she had questions, mostly legal issues that would come up, she would call.
	I just want to make sure, because my question was just how many times?
	And you said two to three times, right?
	Okay.
	And in 2022, how frequently did you speak in 2022?
	This is before you were appointed.
	I'm sorry, 2020.
	How frequently did you speak in 2020?
	He's about to cry.
	More frequent than 19, obviously.
	More frequent.
	Can you tell me approximately a month how often you think you spoke with her on the phone?
	I'm going to object to the granular detail.
	Mr. Wade can certainly answer however he wants to, but if we're going to go through every time you spoke on the phone, as opposed to generally characterizing the relationship, it would be more detailed.
	Judge, I'm not going to go through every time they spoke on the phone.
	I'm asking for generally how frequently they spoke.
	I think at that level, that's fine.
	Thank you.
	About how frequently did you speak in 2020?
	Per month?
	I mean, if it was two or three times that entire year, you can tell me that.
	If it was more than that, then you can quantify it by month.
	No, no, no.
	We spoke on the telephone often.
	I mean, I don't know how many, I couldn't give you an amount of time because you remember COVID happened and the world was shut down.
	So we spoke on the phone more than 2019, Debbie.
	Okay, let's qualify it.
	Before her election in 2020, how frequently did you speak?
	You mean as she was campaigning?
	Before the election.
	Before, yes, as she was campaigning, before she was elected.
	It's two different animals.
	As she was campaigning before she was elected.
	Okay, so during the course of her campaign, we didn't talk as much, obviously, because she was busy.
	Fulton County is a large jurisdiction to cover.
	So we didn't talk a whole lot, but she did know.
	That I'd gone through the election process.
	So when things would come up, she had questions about, she would call me and ask me.
	And just to be fair, I only knew it.
	Judge, actually, he's not asked an answer.
	And I mean, I don't mind him explaining, but I just wanted to know how many times.
	I mean, if we talk about every conversation they talked about, I...
	You gotta let him finish his sentence and then if you need to redirect him or have me direct him, I can.
	Mr. Wade, can you continue?
	Yes.
	So sometimes it would be like a three-second call.
	She would go, have you, during your election, have you ever seen this?
	And I would say, no, but here's what I would do.
	And we'd hang up.
	She had a lot of professionals working for her, but she trusted my judgment, so she'd call me.
	So my question was, how frequently did you speak with her prior to her election?
	Frequently?
	Infrequently?
	More than 2019, but it wasn't an everyday thing, no.
	In 2021, before you were appointed in November, so January to November 2021, only time I'm talking about, how frequently did you speak with Ms. Willis on the phone?
	In 2021, then it became frequent.
	Frequent?
	Yes.
	But you did not work at the DA's office at that point, correct?
	did not um So the affidavit that you submitted, you showed on one record that showed that Ms. Willis had paid $100 for one flight, correct?
	Okay, okay.
	Say it again.
	The affidavit that you submitted to this court showed that Ms. Willis had paid for one flight for $100.
	Is that correct?
	No, man.
	I think that...
	I just want a distinction for...
	Boy, you're cooked!
	...or for her actually booking a flight.
	Those are two separate things.
	I will re-ask it.
	The affidavit you filed on this court.
	You alleged that Miss Willis paid for one flight.
	Paid for one flight, correct?
	No, ma 'am.
	You did not allege she paid for one flight?
	No, ma 'am.
	What I allege is that our travel was split roughly evenly.
	So where you see I have booked the flight or I've paid for a flight with my credit card, what you don't see is that she covered her own flight with reimbursement to me.
	The flights that you see here are the flights that she would have booked with her own resources, with her own car.
	And there's one flight, correct?
	One flight reflecting that she actually booked.
	Let him finish and then you can redirect him.
	One flight that she actually booked, yes.
	The other flights I booked, she paid for.
	So, the affidavit, you submitted one flight that she booked and paid for.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	I'm going to object to the phrasing of that question.
	The line in the affidavit is not as Mrs. Merchant is representing it.
	It said, examples of the district attorney Willis purchasing plane tickets for she and I with her personal funds.
	Out the water!
	Salty water!
	We got salt!
	Wade or for compensating other travelers?
	All right.
	I understand this, Cross.
	I think that's something you can-- it's now on the record, but also something you can take on for us.
	Thank you.
	And just so everybody is clear, all I ask you is your affidavit.
	You submitted proof of one flight that she paid for.
	That's all I'm asking.
	Correct?
	With the explanation, yes, ma 'am.
	All I needed.
	You said in the affidavit that you roughly shared travel though, correct?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Okay.
	So this roughly sharing travel, you're saying she reimbursed you?
	She did.
	And where did you deposit the money she reimbursed?
	It was cash.
	She didn't give me any checks.
	So she paid you cash for her share of all these things?
	Mr. Schaefer, you'll step out if you do that again.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Okay.
	And so all of the vacations that she took, she paid you cash for.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And you purchased all of these vacations on your business credit card, correct?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And you included those in deductions on your taxes, correct?
	No, ma 'am.
	No, you did not?
	No, ma 'am.
	Okay.
	Um, We'll get to that in just a minute, then.
	Let's see.
	So the only thing that you have actual documents is not cash.
	Is this one receipt that you attached to the affidavit?
	Is that correct?
	I object to that question.
	That is a mischaracterization of the assertion that is in the affidavit.
	Is this the only written proof that you have of a trip she paid for?
	That I have?
	Yes.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Okay.
	So you submitted the one piece of written evidence that you have that she paid for something.
	Everything else is in cash.
	Is that accurate?
	No.
	That's not accurate.
	Okay.
	Please tell me, what other receipts do you have, then, that show that she paid for things?
	I don't have them.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		I don't have them.
unidentified		So, this is the only receipt that you have to show that she paid for travel?
		I have, yes, ma 'am.
		Thank you.
		In your divorce case, you filed a domestic relations financial affidavit, correct?
		Yes, ma 'am.
		The first one you filed was in January 2022, right?
		Thereabouts, yes, ma 'am.
		And those are under oath?
		Yes.
		And you also filed corporate taxes in 2022, correct?
		Yeah.
		And tell me about your business.
		Do you have a partnership or are you a solo practitioner?
		As it stands today?
		Yes.
		So today, I have a separate PC My law partner has his own separate PC.
		But we're under the same umbrella, under the same roof.
		So we share expenses, we share income, and we split it.
		So are you a partnership?
		We are a partnership in the sense of we share expenses, we share income.
		Are you registered with the state of Georgia as a partnership?
		The WBC firm that included myself, Terence Bradley, and Christopher Campbell, we were registered in the Secretary of State as a partnership for a short period of time.
		When.
		Things happen and we excuse Mr. Bradley from that partnership.
		It left Christopher Campbell and myself.
		So now you have two separate PCs under the same umbrella, sharing expenses and income.
		Okay, so let me just narrow down my questions then.
		Are you registered?
		And have you been registered at any time in the state of Georgia as Wade and Campbell?
		Wade, no ma 'am.
		You've never been registered as a partnership?
		As Wade and Campbell, no ma 'am.
		Wade and Campbell, yes, thank you.
		But as Wade Bradley Campbell, yes ma 'am.
		Wade Bradley Campbell was registered on April 1st, 2021 and administratively dissolved on September 8th, 2023, correct?
		Yes ma 'am.
		Other than that partnership, you have always been registered as law office of Nathan Wade?
		Yes ma 'am.
		Not with Chris Campbell?
		Correct.
		Thank you.
		So the affidavit that you filed in your divorce case, the first one in 2022.
		I think I'm up to number seven.
		I'm going to just show you, give you a group of exhibits.
		We don't have to go back and forth.
		I'm marking the 2022 as 7. I'm marking the 2024 as 8. I'm marking the credit card statements as 9. And your taxes as 10. I
		agree they should be redacted.
		I don't agree to the relevance, but I haven't tried to tender them yet, Judge.
		I'm just marking them right now so that everyone can follow.
		All right.
		And what is the eventual relevance that you're getting at here?
		Well, I'm going to ask him because one of the things that we have to show in this case is a personal and financial interest.
		And he's talked about how he was reimbursed for these things.
		and so I have a right to go into the bracket.
		So let's see.
		Seven, eight, sorry.
		nine and then ten.
		All right, so right now I'm just going to show you what I've marked as these exhibits.
		Can I see what you're showing up?
		Yeah, of course.
		All from the entity driving behavior.
		I don't want to pull you up to your copy.
		I'm going to go to the driving behavior.
		I'm going to just send it to the driver.
	Can I approach the touch?
	Okay.
	I'm starting to mark as 7, 8, 9, and 10. Same problem for your records as I ask you some questions.
	All right.
	So, So, So these are sworn.
	I'm first going to ask you about the domestic relations financial affidavit, but these are sworn.
	They're filed under oath, correct?
	Yes ma 'am.
	And the most recent one that you filed was filed on January 26, 2024?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	So a few weeks ago.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And in that one, you said that you made $9,500 each month, correct?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	You said that in 2022, well, in 2022, in this case alone, Isn't it true you were paid $303,000?
	Over $303,000.
	I was paid?
	Yes.
	In this case.
	Fulton County.
	By Fulton County.
	I see where you're going.
	So...
	I'm just going to answer the question.
	If he wants to explain it, I've got no problem with that.
	Mr. Wade, just listen to the question asked and just ask.
	Got him!
	In 2022, isn't it true you were paid over $300,000?
	No ma 'am, that is not true.
	You were not paid over $300,000 by Fulton County?
	No ma 'am, I was not.
	Okay.
	How much were you paid in 2022 then?
	So, what I was beginning to explain was Fulton County wrote a check to my firm.
	Okay.
	What happens at that point is the checks are then deposited.
	As you have the bank statements, you see that.
	And then they are dispersed between the three of us.
	So there was Mr. Bradley, there was Mr. Wade, and there was Christopher Campbell.
	A third, a third, a third.
	So when you ask me if I was paid $300,000, the answer is no.
	I got a third of that that went to my personal firm.
	Now, once the money was distributed to my personal firm, Obviously, the expenses come out of that, and I get, at the end of the day, whatever the profit is.
	So I did not get $300,000.
	No, ma 'am.
	And let me just clarify.
	My question was not, did you put in your pocket $300,000?
	My question was, was the law firm of Nathan Wade paid over $300,000 in the year 2022?
	Again, a third of that came to the law firm of Nathan Wade.
	So you're saying that...
	The law firm of Nathan Wade did not receive checks from Fulton County government over $300,000 in the year 2022.
	That's a different question.
	a third of the 300,000 came to Nathan Wade.
	Again, not asking what went in your pocket.
	I'm asking, was the law firm of Nathan Wade paid over $300,000 in 2022?
	I know, but I think we're dancing around the point there, so final time.
	That's fine.
	I can move on, Judge.
	Thank you.
	So you said that they were dispersed amongst all of you, or put into an account with all of you.
	So it's your testimony that for 2022, every check you received from Fulton County government went into an operating account with you, Bradley, and Campbell.
	No, no, no, no.
	That's not what I testified to.
	The Wade, Bradley, and Campbell firm established an account when we decided to purchase a building in 2022.
	At that point, every piece of income that came into the entity went into that account.
	And then after expenses were paid, it was a third, a third, a third, right?
	Once that was dissolved, Then the funds would go into a different account, my account, one of my accounts.
	And then I would disperse the funds between now, Attorney Campbell and myself, one half and one half.
	Okay.
	Makes sense?
	It does.
	Let me be more direct then.
	So the Synovus operating account that you have for Wade, Bradley and Campbell.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	The checks from Fulton County from January of 2022 until June 17, 2022, those checks were deposited in that operating account?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Starting on July 15, 2022, the checks you received from Fulton County up until May 26, 2022, all went into an escrow account that you had at Fifth Third Bank, correct?
	No, not all of them.
	Not all of them?
	Some of them, yes.
	So it's your testimony that some of your checks from July 15, 2022 up until May 26, 2023, some of them went into an account outside of Fifth Third Bank?
	No, I'm not object to the relevance of the financial transactions.
	How much money he made is highly relevant in this case.
	It's the personal financial business and where the money was.
	And, I mean, it's just a follow-up on other things that he's testified to.
	And why is how much money he made relevant?
	Because he represented, it's very relevant.
	He filed an affidavit with the court saying, with another court, he told another judge that he made $9,500 a month.
	That's what he swore to.
	All right, so this entire inquiry is just to establish that prior and consistent statement?
	Yes.
	All right.
	I'll give you a minute or two more to try that, but we're going to have to move on.
	Thank you.
	I know you're saying that you only got a third of the $300,000, but the firm was paid over $300,000 in 2022, correct?
	Ms. Merchant, it's not what I'm saying.
	They're numbers.
	They're there.
	It's the truth.
	The funds were paid.
	They were divvied between the three of us, going into an operating account, expenses paid out of it.
	At the end of that, the 9,000 figure is what you have.
	So that's where you got the 9,000 figure from?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And let's see, let's...
	Prior to when you filed for divorce in November 2021, you would use Mr. Bradley's credit card to pay for things with Ms. Willis, correct?
	And then pay him back in cash.
	I've never used Mr. Bradley's credit card.
	You've never used his credit card?
	Never.
	For transactions to anything with Ms. Willis?
	Out to dinner?
	Anything like that?
	Hotels?
	I've never used Mr. Bradley's credit card.
	I've never used anyone else's credit card.
	Not even my father's, and we have the same name.
	And you'd pay back if you ever did use someone's credit card, you'd pay back in cash though, correct?
	Ma 'am, I've never used someone else's credit card.
	Can you take a look at the bank records that I gave you?
	That's the largest ad you have.
	For the record, what exhibit is this?
	It is exhibit nine.
	It should be the largest section.
	Before there's such questions from that there's exhibits haven't been tendered and I maintain my relevant suggestions.
	All right, let's see what the next question is and maybe then the objection is going to Is that an accurate copy of your Capital One statements that you provided in discovery to, is that an accurate reflection of your Capital One records?
	That I provided in discovery to whom?
	To your divorce lawyers or that you provided in the divorce proceeding.
	Is the question, does he recognize it by sight?
	I'm asking if it's his statement.
	I think that is the question.
	Well I mean it's a thick document but I believe you if you say that that this is This is what my wife's divorce lawyer gave you, I believe it.
	Your name's on every page of that document, correct?
	On every page?
	Pretty much every page.
	It's not every page.
	No, it's not on every page, no matter.
	They're all Capital One bank records.
	Sure are.
	Just take your time.
	Look through it.
	Tell me if there's anything that you think is not yours.
	No, no.
	There appear to be.
	Okay.
	And those bank records show that you paid for travel with Ms. Willis.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	I'm gonna object the relevance of these documents and the...
	Well, I think, are you tenering Exhibit 9?
	I'm going to, Judge, and they're highly relevant to the...
	Well, you've asked them a question about the contents of them and they haven't been admitted yet, so why don't we start there?
	Thanks.
	Those show travel that you and Ms. Willis took.
	Well, so you're asking about the contents of something that hasn't been admitted yet.
	I'm asking them if that's what it shows because I know that they're going to object on relevance.
	Well first we got to see if it's you've authenticated it perhaps and before we get into other details of what's in it I think it needs to be admitted.
	I can tender it.
	That's fine.
	I move to admit them.
	All right.
	Object on relevance.
	All right and on that overruled Ms. Merchant.
	Thank you.
	Those records demonstrate that you paid for travel with yourself and Ms. Willis correct?
	They should.
	Okay.
	And let's just talk about that travel.
	Okay.
	The first trip is Belize in March 2023.
	Is that a trip that you took with Ms. Willis?
	Are you asking?
	Did you take a trip with Ms. Willis in 2023 to Belize?
	I did.
	Did you take a trip to California with Ms. Willis in 2023?
	I did.
	Did you pay for those trips on that credit card?
	I used the credit card to book the travel, but understand...
	She paid you back cash.
	Well, let me say this.
	Let's take the Belize trip, for example, since you started there.
	That was a birthday gift to me, so I paid nothing for that trip.
	Zero.
	Okay.
	So the charges that are on your card, she gave you cash for?
	She did.
	Okay.
	So all of the charges...
	I wanted to get into the charges on the car because traveling with her is a task.
	You can probably imagine the attention that happens.
	So for safety reasons, she would limit her I mean, imagine trying to walk through an airport or sit at a restaurant or do anything.
	So there's no attempt to conceal.
	It's a credit card.
	Everything is here.
	And that's not what I asked.
	Okay.
	What I asked was the charges for Belize in March 2023 on that credit card.
	Those are things you purchased to go with Miss Willis to Belize.
	Those are things that we booked with my card that she paid.
	Yes.
	So those show up on your credit card?
	They do.
	And you're saying that she paid you cash to reimburse you for all of that?
	She did.
	And she paid you cash for both of your portions or just hers?
	Both.
	Okay, so that trip, Belize, just Belize, she paid you for everything on Belize?
	The entire trip.
	So the food, tattoo parlor, all that stuff, she paid for.
	There was no tattoo parlor in Belize.
	The charges, there's a tattoo parlor on the charges.
	I'm not getting into what it was for.
	I'm just asking everything that's on that card related to Belize, she paid you back for.
	Okay.
	Let's talk about California in May 2023.
	You all went to California together.
	Yes.
	And you booked plane tickets.
	Yes.
	And her name was on those plane tickets.
	They were.
	And so I know you said that you were worried about security and things like that, but that wasn't her name.
	When she traveled, she had to use her name.
	Oh, so the plane tickets?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Okay.
	And you paid for those plane tickets and you paid for a hotel.
	So, again, the card, yes.
	You used your credit card, and I'm not asking about after what happened.
	I'm asking, did you use your credit card to book your flight and hotel to California?
	I did.
	And there's a lot of Ubers on there as well for California.
	Did you pay for those Ubers as well?
	Yes.
	We were in Napa.
	And you're saying that Ms. Willis, are you saying that Ms. Willis paid you back for that?
	Yes.
	Did she pay for the entire trip, or did she pay for her half of the trip?
	The Napa trip, she paid for the excursions, so the expenses sort of balanced out.
	I mean, that was never, let me be clear, there was never a time when I would say, hey, I bought dinner.
	Dinner cost $25.
	You need to give me $25.
	If you've ever spent any time with Ms. Willis, you understand that she's a very independent, proud woman.
	So she's going to insist that she carries her own weight.
	And it actually was a point of contention between the two of us.
	She is going to pay her own weight.
	Let me re-ask the question to make sure that you answer it.
	A California trip that you paid for.
	Saying that she did not pay you back for cash.
	Instead, she paid for excursions, and you believe that was roughly half?
	She gave me some cash, yes.
	But what I'm saying is, everything that we did when we got into Napa, she paid for.
	The trip that she booked on her credit card in Miami, did you pay her cash back for your half of that?
	No.
	So you never paid her back for the ticket she bought for you?
	No, no.
	I would say I did pay her back.
	Because there were times when I would pay for dinner, she would pay for dinner.
	It would balance out.
	But in a relationship, man, you don't, particularly men, we don't go asking back for anything.
	So you're not keeping a ledger of things that you paid for versus the thing that she's paid for.
	Which is why I said that it was a point of contention because she is very emphatic and adamant about this independent, strong woman thing.
	So she commanded that she pay her own way.
	But she's the district attorney of Fulton County and she has to file financial disclosures, disclosing any gifts with anybody that she does business with in Fulton County, correct?
	I don't know.
	I don't know!
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		She carries her own weight!
unidentified		Let's talk about Tennessee.
unidentified		You booked a cabin in August 2023.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		She got a tramp stamp!
unidentified		You paid for a cabin in Tennessee.
		That's when you paid for it.
		I don't know when the trip was.
		Can you tell us about that?
		August of 2023?
		Mm-hmm.
		You booked a trip for $1,481.54.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		She carries her own weight!
unidentified		Are you asking me, did I take that trip with Miss...
		Willis, are you asking me?
		First, I was just asking you to acknowledge that that is correct from the records, that you paid for a cabin in Tennessee.
		Do you recall, and hopefully you can do it from your memory, do you recall paying for a cabin six months ago, $1,400.81 in Tennessee?
		Where are we now?
		What page is that?
		I'm just asking from your memory.
		Do you remember paying for a cabin in August?
		He's going to be asked about a particular transaction.
		You can answer whether he remembers or not.
		Mr. Wade, I'm not asking you to go through a thousand pages of records.
		I'm asking if you remember paying for a cabin six months ago in Tennessee.
		No.
		If you remember booking a cabin.
		I booked lots of cabins.
		I booked lots of cabins!
		Did you go to a cabin with Miss Willis ever?
		Ever.
		No.
		Have you ever gone to Tennessee with Ms. Willis?
		Yes.
		Okay.
		When was that?
		That was around 2022, early 2022.
		Early 2022?
		Okay.
		It was a day trip.
		Okay, so you didn't spend the night?
		So it was a day trip.
		We would drive there, have lunch, drive back.
		The reason we would do that is because the attention, she couldn't get any peace of mind going locally, so we'd get in my car and drive to...
		Is that when you went to Fainting Goat with her?
		I think it's in Jasper.
		No, that's in Georgia.
		I don't recall going to Fainting Goat with her.
		So the Tennessee day trips were only Tennessee?
		Yes.
		Okay.
		Did you ever do these day trips in Georgia?
		Do we drive anywhere in Georgia?
		Yeah, you were talking about day trips going out.
		And I'm talking about outside of the metro area.
		Day trips that you were just talking about.
		These trips you were talking about.
		The ones that you were...
		I'm only asking about the ones you were just talking about.
		Are all of those in Tennessee?
		No.
		We drove to Alabama before.
		Okay.
		You drove to Alabama?
		Mm-hmm.
		Did you go anywhere in Georgia?
		North Georgia.
		I'm going to object.
		If she wants to direct his attention in some way to a time frame or a location, then I think it might be easier for the witness to accurately answer.
		Ms. Marshall, I think if you don't have the specific details yourself, we need to start getting into specifics or more maybe broadly phrased questions and just be exploring around indefinitely.
		Is it fair to say that you've taken so many trips with her you don't even really remember all the places you've gone?
		So many trips?
		You're having trouble remembering if you went to North Georgia or not.
		Were you asking me about specific places?
		And I want to be candid in my responses, so I have to jog my memory because these are places that I have frequented, but not with her.
		So I want to make certain that if there was ever a time that she accompanied me that I was candid in that response.
		Aruba, October 2022.
	One of the business records you're going to get for Eastridge might be a little faster.
	But did you take a trip with her to Aruba in 2022?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	So that Aruba trip was a package deal there.
	My mother had recently retired, and I decided to take my mother on a cruise.
	Okay.
	And the second leg, after the cruise concluded, DA Willis and I went to Aruba.
	So that was all one trip, if you will.
	Okay, so my question was, did you go with DA Willis to Aruba in 2022?
	I did.
	Thank you.
	And you paid for that trip using your business credit card, correct?
	I did.
	And you paid for a cruise as well, correct?
	That's the cruise I was referencing with D.A. Willis, my mother, and myself.
	Okay, because there's two cruises, so let's just talk about the first one.
	So the first one was, you took, that's the one with your mother.
	Yes.
	And so you introduced D.A. Willis to your mother.
	That trip, you all took a cruise together, the three of you.
	Yes.
	After the cruise was done, you and D.A. Willis flew to Aruba together, and your mom flew home.
	Yes.
	And you paid for all of this with your credit card, on your business credit card.
	I did.
	And are you saying that Ms. Willis paid you cash back for that?
	She did.
	Now, let me make this distinction, though.
	Because the number that you're looking at reflects the three people on the cruise ship.
	There were things that my mother and I did, just the two of us, that DA Willis didn't do.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		She carries her own weight.
unidentified		Attributing that.
		I did not.
		My math is not good, but I did not include anything with your mother on this.
		You wouldn't be able to see it because it's not separated out.
		It just shows a charge on the account when actually it would have been something with my mother and I. Salty!
		I thought 10 was taxes.
		I'm sorry, 11 and 12. All right, defense 11 and 12. Ms. Cross?
		Based on Ms. Mertz's representation that they are true and accurate as to the certification that was provided to her.
		All right again see no other objection there admitted.
		So the trip just the trip to Aruba alone or UNDA Willis was $3,835.26 correct?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Just Aruba.
unidentified		I'm looking for the amount.
		This one is a lefty.
		Yes ma 'am, $3,835.26.
		And then the Royal Caribbean for just you and Ms. Willis was $1,269.70, correct?
		No ma 'am.
		Your mother's got a different line item on there.
		I'm talking about the cruise, the actual cruise.
		Cabin.
		I think you need to rephrase that as in the form of a question, Ms. Merchant.
		Did you pay Royal Caribbean for yours and Ms. Willis' cabin $1,269.70?
		Where are we?
		Which page?
		We're on the receipts.
		There's just a few pages of receipts on Exhibit number 11. Okay.
		I'm at 11. Can you direct me to where you are in Exhibit 11?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Ladies and gentlemen, that was our feed.
		For some reason, the feed went black.
		We're going to refresh the feed.
		We're going to refresh the feed.
		This is still ongoing.
		Sometimes this happens.
		We're using the PBS News feed.
		We will go find another feed if this one for some reason went black because it is way too damaging, quite frankly, to this case.
		What an absolute total nightmare.
		Let's go, Alex!
		Another feed!
		We should always have a backup feed, boys.
		Okay.
		We're going to continue grabbing the feed.
		We got producers on it right now.
		Our apologies.
		The feed went black for some reason.
		We were using a public broadcast feed, and we do not know why.
		Ladies and gentlemen, here we go.
		Back up.
		We're getting it ready.
		Bring on some super chats.
		Marilyn, God bless you.
		Thank you for making these hearings so entertaining.
		We got plenty more salt for you, baby.
		Back up in just one second.
		This is the only channel that I actually donate to.
		Keep churning it out.
		Quality content.
		David, God bless you.
		We are out here for you.
		We will be live.
		We will remain live on this.
		And this is unbelievably entertaining.
unidentified		Before I went to Aruba, yes ma 'am.
unidentified		Back to it.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Sweaty Nathan's hot dog.
unidentified		Roughly $3,387.
		The cruise to Aruba.
		I mean the cruise to, I'm sorry, the Norwegian cruise.
		So that cruise was with my sisters.
		And the number that you are seeing would reflect my buying dinner for my sisters and their husband.
		I'm just talking about the cruise.
		The amount that was paid for the cruise ahead of time when you booked the cruise.
		I'm just talking about that.
		Okay.
		That was a little over $3,000.
		Yes, ma 'am.
		And I understand you're saying you paid for other things, but I'm just talking about the cruise amount.
		And you paid for a jeep and you paid for dinner while you were there in Bahamas.
		Yes, ma 'am.
		That's the one that Ms. Willis paid for a flight for, correct?
		That's one of the flights she paid for.
		Yes, ma 'am.
		A document it paid for, not cash.
		I'm talking about a non-cash transaction.
		That's what she paid for.
		You mean the one that I provided the receipt for?
		Yes.
		Yes, ma 'am.
		That's that.
		So she booked that on her credit card and wasn't worried about, I know you said earlier that you were booking everything because she was worried about people knowing where she was traveling.
		She didn't have any fears booking that one, though, correct?
		I kind of object to the phrasing of that question.
		Speculate as to what was the motivation of the district attorney.
		She wants to ask if that was the transaction.
		Ms. Murchin, I think you can rephrase the question, but I'll sustain it on that current phrasing.
		So she purchased that under her own name, correct?
		She did.
		Okay.
		Let's see.
		So I know we talked a little bit about the seminar where you all met.
		Isn't it true that you would go to Ms. Willis' house in South Fulton County?
		Occasionally.
		I've never gone to her house in South Fulton County.
		You've never gone to her house in South Fulton County?
		I've never seen her house.
		The first time I even heard the address of that house was when one of the individuals in the The election fraud case somehow doxed it and it got out.
		That was the first time I'd even seen that address.
		But you would go to the East Point condo, correct?
		What East Point condo?
		East Point, Haightville, something like that.
		I've never been to East Point with Ms. Willis.
		You've never gone to a condo in either the East Point or Haightville area with Ms. Willis?
		Wait, that's different.
		I have gone to a condo in Haightville.
		Okay.
		So Haightville.
		Yes, ma 'am.
		So you have gone to a condo with Ms. Willis in Hapeville?
		I have.
		Have you spent the night there?
		Never.
		Never spent the night there?
		Never.
		Is that the condo that was rented by Robin Yerdy?
		I believe it was.
		Other members of the DA staff were there as well, correct?
		Sometimes.
		I've never been around other members of the DA staff at a condo in 8th.
		There's never been any security for Ms. Willis?
	Not around me.
	Did you ever ride with Ms. Willis with her security detail to and from the house?
	No.
	You served on Ms. Willis' transition team, correct?
	Yes.
	And you were part of all of her interviews where she interviewed and re-interviewed employees?
	I would say probably 98, 99% of them, yes.
	Is it fair to say you took an active role in these interviews?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Prior to this, you've never worked in a DA's office, right?
	Have I ever worked in her DA's office?
	At any DA's office.
	Any DA's office.
	No, ma 'am.
	Have you ever managed a large law firm?
	Yeah, I'm going to object to the relevance of these questions.
	Ms. Murray?
	He served on her transition team, and so what we're trying to prove is that there's a personal and financial relationship, and it was improper.
	And so, you know, whether or not he had experience to serve on this transition team, I think is relevant.
	Right.
	I think I already said it.
	We don't need the evidence.
	Terrance Bradley also received a contract for Fulton County, correct?
	Correct.
	You're asking me about Terrence?
	I asked if Terrence Bradley also received a contract for Fulton County.
	I believe that he did.
	You were partners with him at that time, correct?
	I was.
	So under what you testified to earlier, you would get a third of that contract as well, correct?
	I would have.
	And Chris Campbell also had a contract with Fulton County.
	I believe he did.
	And so under what you've testified to, you would also get a third of that, correct?
	I would.
	They both had contracts for what are called first appearance, which is where they would appear on behalf of the district attorney to do first appearance hearings, correct?
	I believe they did.
	And they also had what's called a taint contract.
	They both entered into them January 25th, 2021, correct?
	Filter, yes, ma 'am.
	Taint or filter?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And that was, were working the anti-corruption unit?
	I don't know that it was anti-corruption.
	I think that it was civil rights, maybe?
	Okay.
	Judge, the DA's or phone counties come and I guess brought a certificate now, so we would move to admit the contracts.
	I've got those under that certificate.
	I was planning on doing it under the Open Records Office, but I believe now they certified it.
	I haven't looked at everything they certified though.
	I'm going to ask that the document be looked at and confirmed I'm planning on introducing all of the contracts and invoices.
	I haven't had a chance to look at what Fortwell County certified, so I'm planning on introducing those, and then not much.
	Can we do the not much?
	We'll do the not much, and then we'll get back to the contracts.
	Okay, yeah, definitely.
	Okay, so this Taint contract, and we're not admitting these right now, but if I represent to you that they say anti-corruption unit, can you tell us what a Taint attorney for an anti-corruption unit would do?
	I didn't have a part in those contracts.
	They were your partners at the time, though, correct?
	Oh, absolutely.
	Okay.
	And so you didn't have a part in those contracts, but you got a third of the contract payment.
	Oh, absolutely.
	Okay.
	So the taint contracts that Bradley and Campbell, who are your law partners at the time, had for doing taint review, you got a third of those?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Okay.
	You signed a confidentiality agreement with the DA's office as well, correct?
	I do.
	And I think I'm up to judge 13. Marking that as number 13. Showing you a copy of what I marked as number 13. If you could take a look at that and tell me if that is the confidentiality agreement that you'd find with the district attorney.
	And this basically says you can't talk about anything that happens inside the DA's office, right?
	No.
	It doesn't say you can't talk about it?
	No, no, no.
	You said it basically says that I can't talk about anything that happens inside the DA's office, and that's not what...
	Are you tendering this exhibit?
	I am, yes.
	We would tender 13. Ms. Cross.
	Yeah, let's see the relevance.
	I'm glad there's a relevance objection to otherwise.
	Ms. Merchant, relevance to this?
	Judge, it's relevant to his testimony.
	If he signed an agreement that says he can't talk about things that happened in the district attorney's office, I think that's relevant to this.
	How?
	Because it's motivation in his testimony.
	I mean, whether or not he's going to testify to something.
	He's also been certified.
	I mean, it's part of the record from what Fulton County gave us.
	Sure, but he hasn't said that that's preventing him from testifying in any way today, is it?
	I can ask him about that.
	Mr. Wade, is this confidential agreement affecting your testimony today?
	No, sir.
	Okay.
	All right.
	That's fine.
	The contracts judge and the invoices that I wanted to admit, I wanted to admit all of his invoices and contracts with Fulton County.
	I have them certified.
	I guess I have them certified through Fulton County, so I wasn't sure if I needed to do that.
	I just wanted to know if the state had an objection to those before.
	Well, they had a chance to look at them.
	So that's the sole remaining exhibit in line of questioning here?
	Yes.
	And in terms of the follow-up questions, would it just be for him to...
	Say what's reflected in these documents themselves?
	If they have an objection to the certificates that Fulton County has given, I would admit them through him because he could recognize them.
	But assuming they're admitted, would there actually be anything substantive that he would add of the documents themselves?
	No.
	Okay.
	So subject to that qualification, do you have any other questions of this witness?
	May I just have a moment?
	Sure.
	Thank you.
	Is it possible actually we take a quick break?
	We're getting there.
	Okay.
	Thank you.
	I certainly had the opportunity over lunch to take a look at these documents and work out whatever we could.
	Did you discuss your relationship with Ms. Willis in social settings?
	Help me understand your question.
	No, I heard the question.
	I just need to understand what you're asking me.
	Like, what relationship when...
	Your personal relationship with Ms. Willis.
	Unqualified, I'm sorry.
	Did you discuss your personal relationship, your private, personal, romantic relationship with Ms. Willis in social settings?
	No, ma 'am.
	You've never discussed it in social settings?
	No, ma 'am.
	Did you ever discuss it in front of Robin Yurdy in a non-social setting?
	No, ma 'am.
	Ms. Willis is a very, as in my, we're private people.
	My relationship wasn't a secret.
	It was just private.
	So, not at all.
	I wouldn't have discussed my relationship with Miss Yurdy or anyone else publicly.
	I actually did have some questions just about the invoices.
	These are the documents that you're referring to.
	Yeah, they are.
	It's all of his invoices.
	What kind of questions would these be other than the invoices say what they say?
	Yes, but they say what they say.
	All right.
	Thank you.
	All right.
	At this point, we'll take a break.
	I'll ask the parties to take a look at what did you mark those?
	I have his contracts and his invoices that I'm about to mark.
	So before he leaves me, I just want to make sure that the state doesn't have any address.
	Those are marked as?
	They are about to be marked as 14, 15, 15, 17, and 18. All right, so 14 through 18, so let's take a look at those.
	I will take a look at those and see if I can match them up with the certified documents that we're looking at.
	All right, and then we'll address whether they are tendered for the record when we come back, and from there then we would turn over to the remainder of Defense Counsel and then the state for any examination as well.
	So to that end, let's take 45 minutes.
	We'll be back at 1 o'clock.
	Mr. Wade, you're still under your oath, and I'd ask you not to speak.
	With any other witnesses about your testimony or about any testimony that's already occurred.
	Yes, sir.
	All right, we'll be in recess.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Okay, okay, okay, here we go!
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Lock and load.
		Man, what an unbelievably entertaining, hysterical, and pure comedy gold.
		It's like a Seinfeld episode.
		It is breathtaking.
		We've been trying to get to the Super Chats.
		We'll do one more here.
		Please wave at my 86-year-old mom and her sister.
		They love you, says Jackie LeChamon.
unidentified		Hello!
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		What's going on?
		Jackie, what's the name of your 86-year-old mom?
		We're big fans on this program.
		We love you.
		We love being in a movement of happy, joyful warriors together.
		We march together.
		86 years old?
		Let's go, baby!
		Thank you for watching.
		We love you.
		And thank you for joining us on this special date where we have the gavel of truth that we shall smash down on Big Fanny.
		Getting the hardest possible spanking in court was Loverboy.
		Loverboy's hot dog was just cooked.
		Loverboy's hot dog looks a lot like one of those hot dogs that are sitting in the 7-Eleven hot dog roller over the Christmas break.
		Nobody bothered to change it.
		The guy, you know, the stoner that runs the front of the store just didn't bother to change it.
		Loverboy's hot dog Is a salty, cooked mess, baby.
		Man, if I only had somebody here to help me whine about this.
		Ladies and gentlemen, we have, for the first time on our program, a special guest.
		Somebody who has gone viral talking about Loverboy and Big Fanny and the mess of this case.
		We have so much breaking news, and I think we'll cover it live with her.
		She's been very, very patiently standing by as we cover the breaking news.
		Of course, now Loverboy is off the stand.
		Nathan's hot dog has gone back to his hot dog roller.
		And so nothing's happening in the court right now.
		So we have nothing going on that is breaking or live.
		You're not missing anything.
		But you're going to want to stay tuned for Tasha.
		K, baby!
		Tasha K joins us from her very successful YouTube channel, who's been covering all of this, and we are absolutely honored to have her on the program, ladies and gentlemen.
		Please welcome one of the world's experts on Loverboy and Big Fanny, Tasha K. I've been drinking since this hearing has started.
unidentified		What?
unidentified		Oh my gosh.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Okay, here we go.
		Royce, make sure we get the levels here.
		Okay, we're adjusting levels.
		We are so excited to have you on the program.
		We've been playing your clips.
		The audience loves you.
		I love you.
		Okay, for those who are unfamiliar with your channel, let's just start off with an introduction here.
		Your channel, you whine about things, you talk about certain things, you're from Miami, and you have your giant glass of wine, much like we have our giant salt shaker.
		So we have our giant salt shaker, you have your wine.
		Tasha, can you please give an introduction for the audience?
unidentified		Well, what do you call your viewers?
unidentified		Because I call mine winos.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Yep, we're the Benny Brigade.
unidentified		The Biddy Brigade.
		We do all things wine, gossip, and comedy.
		And I tell you, this has been wine, gossip, and comedy.
		I've been watching this since it started this morning.
		And I'm about drunk.
		And the day ain't even started.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Sounds like the perfect time to go live to 30,000 people on the internet.
unidentified		So let's go.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		So the audience is going bananas for this.
		The comment section is, by the way, melting down.
		I want to see wine glasses in the comment section for support of Tasha.
unidentified		I need them to be hitting their wine glasses.
		They know what's up.
		They are trained.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		So here's something that I want to ask you a couple of questions about this.
		First off, he says, I've been inextricably separated from my wife since 2015.
		And so that means I was allowed to cheat on her, and I was allowed to go and have this relationship with Big Fanny.
		Does that square to you?
		Is this an okay thing?
unidentified		No.
		No.
		We're talking about an over 20-year marriage to Joycelyn Wade.
		Shout out to Joycelyn, a black woman that helped to build this black man that Fanny is enjoying.
		Her Fanny is enjoying.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		No, sir.
unidentified		No, no.
		Listen, I've been married a very long time.
		We're hitting almost 20 years here, my husband and I, and ain't no way.
		I'm going to stick beside somebody that long and he's only going to pay me $1,400 a month and use the money that I helped him to make to spend on her?
		And it's our money, the taxpayers?
		Because let's be honest, I just moved from Georgia.
		I haven't even been in Florida a year and a half.
		So my taxpaying dollars, and believe me, I owe Georgia a lot of money in taxes, okay?
		I am highly pissed.
		That Fanny was tricking.
		And we're going to say allegedly with my money.
		No, no, no, no, no.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		So he is being asked about all of these various valiances, these special little trips that they took.
		And Fanny, she carried her own weight.
		You were taking all these Ubers.
		You were paying for tattoo parlors?
		In the Bahamas?
		In Aruba?
		Somebody was getting a tramp stamp.
unidentified		Where do you think the tattoo is at?
		Because listen, I got a tattoo of my husband right here.
		It's right here.
		You can only see it if I'm in a swimsuit or, you know, I'm having personal time.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		20 years married?
unidentified		As defense counsel called it.
unidentified		Personal time.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Personal time.
unidentified		Come on now.
unidentified		Come on.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		So are people going to buy this?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Like, oh, I forgot that I bought her a tattoo?
unidentified		No.
		No.
		And see, here's my issue.
		I don't think it would have been an issue for two reasons, okay?
		One reason, of course, we see this in businesses all the time.
		People sleep with each other.
		It's the nature of the business.
		Now, for her to be a very, very ambitious black woman, to become the district attorney...
		Yes, it's hard to find someone on that level as a black woman, but when you're working all the time, of course, you're going to hit what's there.
		The same thing happens with male CEOs and district attorneys as well, too.
		But my thing is, one, you're his superior.
		Two, he was married.
		And three, you running me down for money in Georgia that you using on him.
		You buying?
		Can I cuss?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Yo, yeah, please.
unidentified		She buying dick.
unidentified		Come on, on the taxpayers' dollars.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Oh my God.
unidentified		Okay.
		There's a few things.
		No, no, no, no.
		And separating is not good enough.
		They didn't file for a legal separation at all.
		Of course you could tell he was lying during his interrogatories.
		You know, during the divorce, he, oh, you know, he got money.
		Oh, he didn't get money.
		Come on.
		Come on.
		No.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		I would like to play you, and I believe you have, let me know if you have the capacity in your studio to watch a quick clip if I play it for you.
unidentified		Is it going to play live here?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, so we have a quick clip, and if you don't mind, because you seem, you've been married 20 years, right?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Happy Valentine's Day.
unidentified		That's right, thank you.
		We met during Valentine's Day.
		We sure did.
		He supplied me with roses yesterday during my live show.
		Shout out to my husband.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		And what's his name?
unidentified		His name is Shaq.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Shaq.
unidentified		Sheck.
unidentified		Like Shrek, but Sheck.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Sheck?
		Yes.
		So, in your 20 years with Sheck, you have clearly understand, like, men and the way that we speak and the way that we communicate.
		And so I want, for your expertise, I'd like to play you a clip, a simple clip, of Nathan Wade getting asked a question.
		And based on your expertise, tell me, what do you think's happening here?
unidentified		Okay.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Here we go.
unidentified		All right.
		Did you go to a cabin with Miss Willis?
		Ever.
		Ever?
		ever.
		Okay.
		No.
		You've never gone to a cabinet business?
		No.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		If you ask Sheck a question and it takes him 60 seconds of silence and staring at the ceiling to answer, what does that mean?
unidentified		Sheck will be wearing this wine glass.
		Come on now.
		Come on now.
		Too long.
		I need a polygraph done.
		Did you go to a cabin, yes or no?
		A cabin.
		No cabins have very distinct looks.
		They have logs on the outside.
		It's in the northern part of Georgia, maybe Tennessee.
		Come on.
		Come on.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		So are, like, the people in the church buying this because we saw Fannie Wills go to the church.
unidentified		Of course.
unidentified		That's what they always run.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		She gave this speech that, like, you can't criticize a black woman.
		Like, we're a work in progress.
		Like, I'm defrauding the taxpayers.
		I'm breaking up a marriage.
		I'm cheating on this woman's husband.
		Like, you know, don't judge me kind of thing.
		Like, is that going to fly?
unidentified		No, absolutely not.
		And that's why I had to get on it, okay?
		Because she turned it into gossip then.
		It went from wine, gossip, into now it's comedy.
		Absolutely not.
		And that's where they typically go.
		Everyone want to run to the church.
		And let's be honest, I mean, the church has its flaws too, but you, as a district attorney, who was elected by the community of people?
		Like, no, no, it's not going to fly.
		And I was morbidly disgusted that you went up there to cap for a man.
		Who has yet to even properly claim you, and you're claiming that, why should he have to go through this?
		Why should I have to answer in front of a church, and you're not married?
		You've been fornicating with this lady's husband for years, allegedly.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		And they admitted to that today on the stand.
		Now, one of the issues is that he's put together two different affidavits with two different dates as to when the...
		When the relationship started, let's just call it whatever that is.
		You know, when the affair started.
		So you're cheating on a married man.
unidentified		When the fucking started.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Okay, so you can say dick, we'll say hot dog on this program.
		Either way, the emojis are all available in the comment section.
		My question to you is this, and you brought up such an important point.
		Why does nobody care about the black woman whose relationship and marriage has been destroyed through all of this?
		Like, why does nobody care about his wife?
unidentified		And that's my main concern, and that's what made me really speak out on it, is because, like, when I saw that he was a...
		First of all, and I can't say, you know, for sure if this is what he was doing, but it looks like, because he's a lawyer, he obviously has great contacts, you know, in the system, in the state of Georgia.
		To be able to pay a woman that you were with for almost, for over 20 years, $1,400 a month?
		You're using your status to silence her.
		And it's not until you and Fannie, you know, are pillow talking that you decide that you want to be extremely ambitious and use the money, our money, because like I said, I'm still a Georgia taxpayer.
		I am still paying Georgia taxes right now.
		To be paid for alleged favors.
		To service a very high-powered woman and your wife is at home and can't even qualify for food stamps and has to beg you for money after she probably put her money together to help you to get to where you are.
		And I know Jocelyn Wade is somewhere sitting down right now saying that there is a God and she didn't have to step into a church to plead her marriage, to plead.
		You know, what she did or didn't do before a church because what she was doing was all under God.
		I'm just appalled at it all.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		There is such a...
unidentified		No, I just want to know how much he paid her because he made it go away real fast.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
		So they've been trying to cover this up, but now that it has burst forth onto the scene and all these expenditures and all these credit card bills are out there, now it seems like the people of Georgia and specifically the voters of Fulton County that I know you are familiar with are getting very upset.
		We are seeing people that certainly aren't Republicans.
		I doubt these people have ever worn a MAGA hat, but they're going to these public hearings and ripping.
		Big Fannie, a new one.
		They're embarrassed.
		Like, do you have people back in Georgia that are embarrassed about all this?
unidentified		Embarrassed.
		Highly embarrassed.
		And a lot of people that I know are personally Republicans.
		They may not be Trump supporters, but they're Republicans.
		You know how hard it is as entrepreneurs, as citizens who are highly paid.
		You know, and we have to allocate the, I mean, and we're paying double taxes.
		You know, I moved to Florida, you know, we pay federal taxes here.
		There's no really no state taxes here.
		So it's, it's a lot of, you know, leeway here, but in Georgia, I mean, they, they want their money and they want it now.
		And I just, I don't think anybody's going to buy it.
		You know, if you're going to be ambitious and pillow talk with prosecutors and, and, you know, give them raises on how great their penises are or hot dogs are.
		Because let's be honest, he has no game.
		He can't talk.
		He can't talk.
		He's not cute.
		And I'm tired of all these men thinking they're coming out and wearing a beard.
		That makes up for their looks.
		I'm sorry.
		I'm tired of this trend.
		It's like the BBL trend.
		The beard's got to go and the BBL's got to go.
		I'm sorry.
		No, no, no.
		We're not buying it.
		Absolutely not.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		So we saw him sweating a lot.
		He was sweating!
		You have an entire channel sort of built on understanding human nature and reading people and calling out bullshit where you see it.
		And if you see a man who is incapable of answering simple questions like, did you go to a cabin or were you reimbursed in cash?
		And if you see a man profusely sweating, right?
		Let's take your wonderful husband.
		You've been together for two decades.
		If he's profusely sweating, I hate bringing your husband into this.
		It's time.
		It's been Valentine's Day, right?
unidentified		We drag him on the channel too.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		I have a wife.
		We've been married seven years.
		If she asks me a question and I start pouring sweat, and I start looking like this, and then I look up at the ceiling, and then I'm silent, like, what does that mean?
unidentified		He lied.
		And let's be honest, he lied when he divorced his wife.
		Come on now, when he was in the process of divorce, he lied about how much he was making.
		That's how he was able to get, Bob would only pay him $1,400 with spousal support.
		He just lied.
		He done lied the entire marriage.
		You can tell.
		He's a liar.
		Hell, he's a lawyer!
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Fannie Willis is going to write herself off as a victim here.
		And she's already trying to, right?
		We've seen her public statements.
		I'm the victim.
		This is racist.
		Is any of that going to fly with the voters?
		She has an elected position, right?
		Like, do the people you're talking to in Georgia and your comment section and your audience, like, do they see Fannie Willis as a victim in this affair?
unidentified		Uh, no.
		Absolutely not.
		We see it as pathetic.
		I mean, black women in our, like, I'm an entrepreneur.
		I'm a black woman.
		According to society, I'm in a high position, okay?
		So when you're in a high position, you're expected to do the right thing.
		No, just because you need is...
		That is not an excuse.
		Benny.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Hot dog.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		7-Eleven.
unidentified		It is not an excuse at all.
		No.
		And let's be honest.
		Majority of the people that voted her in the office were African-American.
		I mean, African-American.
		You know, Republicans primarily are situated on the outside of Atlanta.
		So we're talking about Fulton County.
		And you know what's really just kind of nerve-wracking?
		You are a district attorney, highly decorated black woman, and you're a mistress.
		You're a side bitch.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Listen, facts are facts.
		There's no other way to say that.
		You're cheating with a married man.
		You're a homewrecker.
unidentified		I don't know what else to call that.
		If it were a white woman in this position, I would be calling her the same thing.
		You're a highly decorated district attorney who's tricky, but you happen to be a mistress and a side bitch.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		There's a reason why we booked Tasha Kay.
		I have a feeling Tasha Kay will be a very, very regular guest on this program.
		I want to get your thought, because I've never lived in Georgia.
		And I've only been to Fulton County in passing or one quick overnight for a business.
		I don't know it well, right?
		And you know it well.
		I don't know if you're from there originally, but you seem to know Georgia quite well.
		This clip, and it'll just play beside us, so feel free to talk over it, but this clip has always shocked me.
		This is a clip of Donald Trump, after getting his mug shot, driving through Fulton County, and the people of Fulton County are walking out in the streets and cheering him.
		And if you listen to the clip, they're saying Fannie Dunn effed up, and they're saying free Trump is what people are saying.
		Can you please explain this?
		Let's go volume down.
		Yeah, let's go volume down, Royce.
		Can you please explain, like, this clip fascinated me.
unidentified		It fascinated you because as a black American, as black people, we love the...
		We love it.
		We love it.
		And let's be honest, as black Americans, we were all Trump supporters before he became president.
		He was cool.
		He was all in the music video, all up in the video, like Sean Diddy Combs.
		You know?
		We were watching him on his reality shows.
		I mean, he was somebody that we aspired to be.
		I mean, we bought his books.
		We did everything.
		But it's when he became president, I'm going to be honest with you, and I've had my issues with Trump.
		I have.
		And that was when, you know, they had those riots up in Virginia, and he condemned both sides.
		And I'm like, wait a minute, you can't condemn both sides.
		They came out there with Home Depot ticket torches, you know, causing problems and things like that.
		And so I didn't like his views on that.
		And I didn't like how he handled the young men in New York by putting, you know, press releases and stuff out, trying to catch these innocent black men because, you know, this white woman was raped, per se, and it turns out that they didn't even...
		They didn't even rape her, you know?
		And so I have my issues with that.
		But he was given information, the same type of information that we were given.
		And he does come from, let's be honest, I mean, he grew up in the 50s, 60s, 70s, you know?
		So he has that, especially, you know, with us being from the side, he has that deep-rooted, you know, I consider myself black.
		I stay on my side.
		You know, I'm from Panama City, Florida originally, and Trump is from New York.
		He stays on his side.
		You know how segregated New York is.
		It still is to this day.
		So now, after having, you know, Joe Biden in office and seeing as a Democratic president, him allocate money to every other community, but black Americans and even citizens of this country.
		Listen, I'm going to be honest with you.
		Me and my people sitting around, we cheering just like them folks there.
		Fannie, you done fucked up.
		And it's Trump.
		It's Trump.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		So there's a lot of sentiment.
		Obviously, politics is far more than just a data point.
		There's a lot of sentiment that is bundled up here.
		But the sentiment that you get whenever you talk to people on the streets, especially in black neighborhoods, is the Democrat Party abandoned us.
		They are filling the coffers of illegal criminal aliens in this country and serving them.
		And life has not gotten better for us.
		It's gotten far worse under Joe Biden.
		And Trump got us money.
		That's like an exact quote from a clip we play often with interviews of young black men saying, no, Trump wanted us to get out, get money, and get paid.
		And that's the difference.
		With Biden, we're broke.
		And that shows in the polling.
		Well, that shows in the polling where Trump is quite, frankly, even with Joe Biden, with black men polling.
		And that's like historically unprecedented.
		And so you're saying that there's the sentiment behind that is that the Democrat Party just doesn't care about us.
unidentified		Absolutely not.
		Absolutely not.
		And Joe Biden specifically doesn't.
		And that's why he doesn't employ black men to work in the White House.
		He believes in locking them up.
		Let's talk about the crime bill.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Well, yeah, sure.
		Or the fact that Joe Biden, like, I've always wondered this, Tasha, like, why?
		So the crime bill put hundreds of thousands of young black men behind bars for a scintilla of the amount of crack cocaine that his own son's done on camera, right?
		Like, that was part of the crime bill, is to lock up people for crack, and his son was on crack at the time he passed that bill.
		His son was doing the drugs.
unidentified		I said during my comedy show in Atlanta, Joe Biden was too busy locking niggas up.
		That was selling dope.
		And meanwhile, he was raising a nigga in his house.
		Let's talk about it.
		That white boy don't pay no child support.
		He got pictures of his hoes and his dope in his phone.
		Listen, and maybe he blames the black community for the way that his son turned out, but no, we can go really down the line to see how that dope came into the whole community.
		America as a community.
		We're not going to go there.
		I was like, Joe, now see how God works.
		Your hate is so bad the whole time.
		Your son messing with strippers, getting them pregnant, going to court, child support court, telling him he ain't got it.
		Pond my artwork, pond my Porsche, knowing that his daddy got the money.
		And there are still black men that are still sitting in jail to this day under his crime bill.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		That's a matter of fact.
		There are hundreds, there are arguably probably many thousands, maybe tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of black men that went to jail for crack, and they did literally a scintilla of what Hunter Biden did.
		And that's just demonstrable, empirical fact.
unidentified		And he never apologized for it, brushes over it when people speak about it.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Yes, that's right.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		And it does, like, it does, it really makes you question, like, it really makes you question, like, who the real racist is when it comes to, you know...
unidentified		It's Joe Biden!
		What are you talking about?
		It's Joe Biden!
		We saw how much he despised and how jealous he was of Obama being in office.
		All that shit he talked about him.
		Didn't think that as a black man he was gonna become president and then that same black man came and asked him to be VP.
		I'm telling you, listen, don't make me...
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		So what do you think?
		What's your bet for 2024, Tasha?
		Do you think black people will vote for Trump?
unidentified		It's going to be Trump.
		It's going to be Trump.
		And let's be honest, our votes really don't count.
		It's them electoral votes.
		But it's going to be Trump.
		They've done everything that they can to keep him out, and it's making him stronger.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		That's my final question for you.
		This has been one of my favorite interviews of all time, but this is my final question for you because I think that it sort of gets to the point here, which is there's an entire community of people of all races that think the system is rigged against them and that the system is out to get them.
		And then they watch Donald Trump and they see what's happening in Fulton County.
		They see what's happening in New York and they see what's happening across the country inside of D.C. and they see every system out to get Trump.
		For literally anything, right?
		Threw away the wrong cup.
		It was a Starbucks cup.
		It should have gone in the recycle.
		Boom, there's federal charges, right?
		Like anything they can possibly throw at Trump, they're clearly weaponizing and trying to get him.
		And I think that speaks to a lot of people that are like, my God, the system is actually rigged.
		And they've decided that Donald Trump represents me and represents like normal, like people in America and our interests.
		And so they're going to go after him.
		They want to come after me, but he's standing in the way.
		So they're going to go after Trump.
		And is all of these cases, including Fulton County, are these validating that there is a rigged system in this country and that maybe we need somebody in there to fix it?
unidentified		Absolutely.
		And I'll be honest with you, if black people...
		Let me just say this, and I can't speak for all black people, you know?
		Obviously, we live on different sides of the fence.
		We all come from different backgrounds and things like that.
		But this is a clear case.
		Even just kind of looking at how Trump is being handled, black men have been handled the same way Trump is being handled right now.
		He's being dragged from court to court to court.
		You know, his lawyers are going bankrupt trying to fight for their freedom.
		You know, like, if this isn't a clear case of this is the history of America and what it's done, and now that it's happening to a white man who is considered privileged, but yet they are bleeding him dry of his money, trying to fight this, because let's be honest, the justice system is rigged.
		It's either public defender or you can afford it to be able to afford a great lawyer and fight.
		And so, listen, I just think everything speaks for itself.
		And Fannie, I just don't...
		If the shoe were on the other foot, I do not think that Nathan Wade would save her the same way she's trying to save him.
		I don't think he would have went to the black church, given the way that he's done his own wife.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I mean...
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		All these years.
unidentified		So, yeah, I just...
unidentified		Those are my thoughts on that.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		When somebody shows you who they are, believe them.
unidentified		Absolutely.
unidentified		Absolutely.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		I just think it's fascinating what you just said, though, because it maybe explains why so many rappers are endorsing Trump.
		Every day, there's a new Snoop Dogg, 50 Cent, Lil Pump, Quavo, Waka Flocka.
		I'm starting to lose track of the number of rappers that publicly, out of the blue, are endorsing Trump.
		After the mugshot, some of them are getting tattoos, not the kind that Nathan Wade paid for, Fannie's tramp stamp, but some of them are getting tattoos on their thighs, like full-body tattoos of Donald Trump, which is a phenomenon that we have never seen before ever in politics.
unidentified		And I have my own issues with the rap culture in itself, and so that's a whole other conversation to debate.
		But, I mean, the rappers can definitely see themselves in Trump.
		I mean, he's got Rico cases all over the country.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		He's having to fight him the same way.
		And I think for a moment, it's like, okay, we're human.
		And then Trump operates under the no snitching policy that we have not within the black community, but in the black gang community.
		So there's a difference.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		I think that people simply wanted a America to be, simply wanted a president to be a president for all of America.
		Like, not to be a president for a certain racial group or to bring more division, but to actually, like, just simply represent America, and that movement's called America First.
		There it is.
		There's the tat.
		That's my thigh, Tasha, actually.
		That's a photo my wife took last night.
unidentified		Now, whatever rapper got that, that's a tramp stamp.
unidentified		And don't get me started on these rappers now, because they play like they hard, but they really, like, they fannies fanned.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		So that's Lil Pump's...
		I'd like to say that that's a photo my wife took on Valentine.
		That's Lil Pump's thigh.
unidentified		He's not one of us.
unidentified		That's one of yours.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Don't know.
unidentified		Yeah, he is.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		But there's another rapper...
		Can you guys get me his name?
		There's another rapper that also got a full Make America Great Again tat.
		We have an encyclopedia, actually, of Donald Trump mugshot thigh tattoos.
		Yeah.
unidentified		But...
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Nonetheless, I think that people actually, like, I think that the America First messaging is really, really resonating.
		Because actually now, it's like, are you in favor of sending billions of dollars to some other country?
		Are you in favor of people that weren't raised here and weren't born here and that came here illegally?
		Or are you in favor of people that are actually natively born in America?
		That's America First.
		And I think that message is, like, truly resonating and breaking through now.
unidentified		And they're passing bills while we're sleeping at night.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		Yeah.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		That is exactly right.
unidentified		That's the issue that I have.
		Why are we sending billions of dollars to a country that's done?
		Yes.
		What is that?
		Why?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Very much.
unidentified		Why?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Here's Badman Cavo.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Who is that?
unidentified		Badman Cavo.
unidentified		He's one of yours, too.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		I don't know if this is like...
unidentified		That man is not one of ours.
		He has a BBL.
		No, sir.
		No, no.
		We give him to y'all.
		You got to come up with somebody better.
		We need somebody better.
		He ain't one of ours.
		He got a BBL and he's a rapper.
		He's had lipo too.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		I'm going to say no comment, okay?
		I'm going to take my Fifth Amendment.
		I'm going to do my Fifth Amendment.
		I'm not going to do a Dave Chappelle racial draft.
		I've seen that episode, okay?
		That'll be our next episode, Tasha.
		I did want to say, however, somebody who won't ever plead no comment is Tasha K. You should follow her channel, and you should also go to her new stand-up tour that she is.
		There's the website right there.
unidentified		Tell us about your tour.
		OneStage.com.
		We are going on tour.
		We've been on tour since last year, but we just unveiled a new tour this year, and we're pulling up to your city.
		Naples, Florida is the first.
		Atlanta's almost sold out.
		We're going to be in Indianapolis, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Charlotte, Riley, Virginia Beach on Mother's Day.
		I'm working, okay?
		And I'm bringing this wine, gossip, and comedy to your city.
		And the tickets ain't but $20, okay?
		That don't hurt taxpayer dollars.
		That don't hurt your pocket.
		$20.
		Everybody got $20.
		You coming, Benny?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		$20.
unidentified		You coming?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Oh, yes.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Oh, you better believe it.
unidentified		I'm going to give you VIP access.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		You better believe it.
		I'm in Tampa.
		So are you anywhere near Tampa?
unidentified		We coming to Tampa?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Count us in.
unidentified		Done.
unidentified		All right, I'm going to give you VIP, and I'm going to throw the mic to Benny, too.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		We'll bring the whole crew.
		That will be amazing.
		That will be amazing.
unidentified		Thank you so much.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Done.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Done.
unidentified		Thank you.
unidentified		Thank you.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Tasha, Godspeed.
unidentified		Thank you.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		See you soon.
unidentified		Wino Nation.
unidentified		We're out.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Benny Brigade.
		Listen, ladies and gentlemen, we are trying our hardest on this program to create a movement.
		And to create a movement, it's an addition, not subtraction.
		You must add to your happy warriors and to your joyful army, you must add to them, to your Benny Brigade, addition, not subtraction.
		And so we're like...
		We're so honored to have Tasha K on.
		Again, we are recent subscribers to her channel, but we just couldn't believe the quality of the content.
		And will we be getting a Tasha K Benny stand-up special in the works?
		Rolls Royce, what do you think?
unidentified		Let's do it.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		I think we do it.
		When Tasha K is in Tampa, I promise you we will be there.
		Maybe we'll do some more content.
		Oh man, even my wife is chiming in now.
		Nurse Kate says she is hysterical with smiley faces.
		Okay, very good.
		Good way to start the day after Valentine's Day.
		Oh man!
		Speaking of Valentine's Day, Donald Trump spent Valentine's Day with Melania Trump and then this morning, Donald Trump, we posted it obviously all across our social media.
		And we didn't have time because Nathan Wade had already taken the hot dog stand this morning.
		But Donald Trump did not show up to the hearing.
		I'm sure you already know this.
		But there's a reason why we weren't live, like, right away at 9 o 'clock.
		And we had promised because Donald Trump wasn't showing up.
		He decided to go to a different hearing in New York City.
		This is a different hearing that his lawyers advised him to go to to try and get the case dismissed.
		This is the, obviously, Soros-funded fraudulent case.
		About Donald Trump's accounting, like accounting errors.
		The novel legal theory by Alvin Bragg, who has nothing to brag about except for a bunch of...
		And Donald Trump made a statement there.
		Again, ladies and gentlemen, we will go back to Nathan Wade on the hot dog stand.
		If, in fact, he does take the stand, we are monitoring the news, ladies and gentlemen, and he is not on...
		The stand.
		If he comes back, then we'll pop on over.
		But I did want to show you what Donald Trump had to say this morning.
		Donald Trump went to the cameras in Manhattan before his case.
		We did promise you that we would bring you Trump live this morning.
		We were going to bring you this live.
		Nathan Wade, hot dog stand, same time.
		Okay, we clipped it, and we have it for you.
		Rolls Royce, we ready to go?
		Donald Trump speaking to the press.
		In New York City, in Manhattan.
		This is what Donald Trump had to say.
		Do we have the full one?
		Let me know if we have the full one.
		Yep, okay.
		Ladies and gentlemen, we told you we would bring you Trump Live.
		This was what Donald Trump said live about one hour ago, but it's worth listening to the president, and we believe that he should obviously have his day.
		We are monitoring the hot dog stand.
		Here's Donald Trump.
karl rove ▲ ● ▼		Last interview is October.
karl rove ▲ ● ▼		The last news conference is November.
unidentified		Yeah, you're right about that.
		I apologize.
		I'm going to go downtown to former President Trump.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Thank you very much.
		Everything that I've heard and read, even from legal scholars, said there's absolutely no case here.
		It's not a crime.
		This is not a crime.
		And when you look at what's going on outside of the streets, where violent crime is at an all-time high, I think it's a very, very, it's a great double standard.
		The other thing, this case could have been brought three years ago.
		There is no case.
		They decided not to bring it.
		District Attorney Bragg didn't want to bring it.
		He said he doesn't want to bring this case.
		But it's not a crime.
		We're here for something that is not a crime.
		Nobody's ever seen anything like it.
		What it is, is election interference.
		It's being run by Joe Biden's White House.
		His top person was placed here in order to make sure everything goes right.
		This is a terrible time for our country.
		This is a real dark period for our country.
		His top person, Colangelo and some others, have been placed into the DA's office to make sure they do a good job of election interference.
		There's never been anything like this in the history of our country.
		With all of this being said...
		I look outside.
		I look at the streets.
		It's so different from when I left New York.
		It's so different.
		It's dirty and it's crime-ridden.
		And today you walk down the street and you get mugged or you get shot.
		And they're doing this where literally legal experts, legal scholars said...
		They don't understand it.
		There's no crime.
		And there was no crime here at all.
		This is just a way of hurting me in the election because I'm leading by a lot.
		We're leading by numbers that nobody's ever seen before.
		And they figured this is their way of cheating this time.
		Last time they had a different way.
		This time they have something that's really down and dirty that no, frankly, no country does other than a third world country, a banana republic.
		So we're going to do our process.
		They want to rush it because they want to get it desperately before the election.
		If it goes before the election, that's what they want to do.
		They don't care.
		After the election, they wouldn't have brought this except for the fact, no way, except for the fact I'm running for president and doing well.
		If I were doing poorly, they wouldn't have brought it.
		And frankly, if I didn't run, they would have been extremely happy because they don't like me running and they don't like the numbers.
		The poll numbers have us beating him by a lot.
		So, that's where we are.
		I'll talk to you later after.
		We don't know what's going to happen.
		We want delays, obviously.
		I'm running for election.
		How can you run for election to be sitting in a courthouse in Manhattan all day long?
		I'm supposed to be in South Carolina right now, where other people are and where...
		Again, this is where I should be.
		I shouldn't be in a courthouse or something that virtually every legal scholar says they don't understand that there's no crime.
		Even if he was guilty of something, there's no crime.
		So I will say that enjoy it.
		It's a sad thing.
		It's a sad day for New York.
		They really do.
		Look, I love this city and I love this state.
		They have to focus on violent crime that's taking place outside.
		You have a new form of crime now.
		You have migrant crime.
		Migrants are trying to beat up our police officers.
		They're trying to do things that we've never seen before, actually.
	We are going to have a problem with, I call it Biden migrant crime, because you have millions of people came into this place, this country that has been so badly hurt.
	And they're doing things that nobody's ever seen before.
	So you have violent migrant crime.
	And they're after me for doing nothing wrong.
	You know, I paid almost $300 million in taxes over the period of time.
	$300 million.
	And they say, oh, let's get Trump out.
	You have people that...
	Everything is politics in this city, including decisions and judges and everything else.
	It has to straighten out, and they have to focus on violent crime, not made-up crime.
	Thank you very much.
	We'll see you later.
unidentified		Thank you.
		Mr. President, can you expand on your NATO comments?
		So there was the opening comment there as he heads into court.
		Jonathan Turley and Karl Rover riding shotgun.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		So, ladies and gentlemen, don't...
		Trump in court today.
		We wanted to, of course, as always, let the president speak.
		One of the most repulsive things that happens in the entire media landscape is people interrupt Donald Trump.
		It enrages us.
		Let the man speak.
		And for that matter, let Biden speak.
		Do you know what I mean?
		Like, let them talk.
		So we wanted to play you Trump's full comments.
		We have a producer monitoring in New York, well, from the East Coast, Donald Trump's case.
		Here's what the Daily Mail has published as of recording time right now.
		This is the most recent news.
		And also, of course, we will cut back to Nathan Wade when Nathan Wade is back on the weenie roller, we will call it.
		Trump leaves Trump Tower on way to blockbuster hearing.
		In Hush Money case, ex-president faces two major court battles as Georgia judge also considers disqualifying Fannie Willis.
		Donald Trump, this is obviously the Alvin Bragg, like Donald Trump accounting case.
		That as you heard Donald Trump say here, like nobody's ever charged a case like this before.
		And so Donald Trump is in court right now as it pertains to this case in New York.
		We had heard all week that Trump was going to be in the Georgia case.
		We weren't lying to you, of course, nor were we trying to drum anything up.
		Over the last 24 hours, that calculus shifted.
		And we think we know why.
		Because this Fannie Willis case is, like, dead.
		This is it.
		The Fannie Willis case is dead.
		The case in Washington, D.C. is going to be perpetually delayed.
		Like, it's now stuck in the Supreme Court.
		And the Supreme Court is going to decide whenever Clarence Thomas decides to drop the gavel.
		Like, they're stuck.
		The Fannie Willis case is, like, literally toast.
		And I got some really unbelievable breaking news for you.
		Hold on.
		This is breaking.
		This is incredible, ladies and gentlemen.
		According to MSNBC, the Fannie Willis case is dead.
		This is shocking.
		This is live.
		This is breaking right now from our producer.
		The Fannie Willis case is dead.
		MSNBC legal analyst declares Fannie Willis case against Trump is dead.
		Things are going in the direction we think.
		Fannie Willis lied to the court.
		It is game over.
		She is disqualified.
		Holy smokes.
		A ton of new updates rolling in.
		Let's cut to the clip.
		MSNBC, of all places, get your salt shakers out, baby.
		Here's a salt that lib if we ever had one.
		Here's a salt that lib.
		If we've ever salted a lib, this is a lib that you should salt.
		Listen to MSNBC admit the Georgia case against Trump is officially finished.
unidentified		It's It's so legalistic-centric and yet so important and fascinating.
		Right.
		Don't let the legalese fool you.
		This is epic.
		This is monumental.
		If things are going in the direction we think...
		If Fannie Willis lied to the court, it's game over for her.
		She will be disqualified if they had a relationship prior to when they represented to the court.
		It's a huge deal.
		I can't overstate it.
		And do you feel the same way, Charles, based on the testimony of what we just heard?
		And we just learned Nathan Wade, who is the special prosecutor in this case, walked in the courtroom.
		He is being sworn in to testify now about this issue and his relationship with Fonny Willis.
		Let's listen.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		All right, ladies and gentlemen, that is breathtaking.
		MSNBC admitting that they're finished.
		To show you, ladies and gentlemen, sort of where...
		We were this morning as of broadcast time.
		Here's the clip, obviously, of Donald Trump and Nathan Wade being live together on screen.
		We made the decision to pivot to Nathan Wade because we were clipping the Trump clip anyway, and we knew that Trump's statement would be much shorter, and also because we had the live shot from inside of the court.
		So, ladies and gentlemen, Nathan Wade will be back up on the...
		Weenie roller soon.
		There's motion in the courtroom, my producer tells me.
		This could be the moment of disqualification.
		The judge is not acting very pleased with the way that the defense is presenting their case.
		This judge has signaled that he is going to disqualify Fannie Wills.
		Now, why do I say that?
		Because based on my knowledge, number...
		Trial lawyers and prosecutors that I've called.
		Friends of the show.
		Mike Davis.
		You know Mike Davis.
		You know these people.
		They come on the show, right?
		And I call them up whenever there's a legal issue.
		What's this?
		What's this?
		Every single one of them tells me, this judge talking about disqualification means he's going to disqualify.
		Because it means that what's going to happen is that he's already seen the evidence for disqualification.
		Ladies and gentlemen.
		We are back live inside of the courtroom.
		This is live.
unidentified		Here we go.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Nathan Wade on the weenie stand.
unidentified		I can't agree that the documents that are not in a certified bundle are properly admitted as part of the exhibit.
		Okay.
		Ms. Murchin, would you like to repackage and present to Ms. Cross at Defense Exhibit 14?
		They're exactly what I got from the county attorney.
		Apparently, they didn't want to testify, so they gave us a certification but didn't put these in, so they're going to have to testify.
		I got them from them.
		The documents, the difference between the two document productions, what is the difference?
		Bank records, credit card statements, things like that, that wouldn't ordinarily be part and course of the county.
		But I got them from the Open Records portal.
		I understand.
		But the difference in production, Ms. Merchant, you've taken a look at them and they're actually material to your case?
		Yes.
		In what way?
		They're all of his invoices, Judge.
		This is what I got from them.
		It's all of his invoices.
		And one of the invoices is a reimbursement that he printed some things.
		I don't really care if they take the reimbursement out because they're actually already admitted in the other exhibit I did.
		I don't have any problem with the invoices.
		The invoices are clearly the records contained in the certification code.
		If we remove the items that are in dispute, then I don't have an objection to that.
		So you're removing them?
		All right.
		So again, let's have proposal council look at a revised Exit 14, and then I'll hear whether there's any objection.
		The revised
		Exhibit number 14 contains only the invoices that were submitted and the state has no objection.
		All right then, I'm not seeing any other issues from other counsel.
		We'll note Exhibits 14 through 18 have been admitted to the record without objection.
		I think at this point it'd be good to make sure we've got I think 1 through 18 with the corporate I think we ought to do
		that.
		yeah thank you As Ms. Merchant is doing that, let me go down the list.
		Mr. Saydown.
		Mr. Saydown is deferring.
		Then I'll go to Mr. Stocks.
		Mr. Durham, on Zoom.
		All right, Mr. McDougald.
		I will defer to Mr. Gillard.
		All right, Mr. Rice.
		All right, thank you, Mr. Gillard.
		Thank you, Your Honor.
		Good afternoon, Mr. Wade.
		Good afternoon, sir.
		A few follow-up questions.
		I'd like to start off with the exhibit number four that you should have up there.
		Those are the interrogatories.
		No, sir.
		They're not up there.
		Remember, I asked her to compile them all.
		I'm sorry, I'm going to go with you if you want to get a comment.
		Okay.
		Now, these are the interrogatories that you had filed on May the 30th, 2012.
		in your divorce case, correct?
		Yes, sir.
		Now, you went over in part some of those interrogatories, but what I want you to do, because I want to get down to the specific language to clear up exactly what the interrogatories asked for and exactly what you answered, okay?
		Now, if we look on the interrogatory that I believe, as we indicated, they're really, I think, on page two, the one that starts off, describe each instance of the interrogatory in which you've had sexual relations.
		Yes, sir.
		You see that one?
		Yes, sir.
		Right.
		Now, that interrogatory begins, describe each instance in which you have had sexual relations with a person other than your spouse during the course of the marriage, including...
		The period of separation.
		You see that?
		Yes, sir.
		Now, these were filed on May the 30th, 2023, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	Now, at that time, you had had sexual relations with Ms. Willis, correct?
	Your Honor, I'm going to object to the question that's great.
	I think the question is properly, at that time, certainly asked about his answer.
	I just ask you to rephrase, but I think you can make the same point.
	Your Honor, it's a specific interrogatory, and I would, you know, so the words do matter, and I would like him to answer whether or not he'd have such relations with Ms. Willis, because if he answered yes, then this interrogatory is a false interrogatory.
	So I would ask the court's indulgence.
	I'm not here to jump into some salacious veteran situation.
	But this is an interrogatory that matters, so I would ask the court's indulgence.
	Ms. Cross?
	These questions have been answered several times.
	I understand Mr. Gillen is coming at it from a different way, but this question is not substantively different than those that have already been asked and answered in the information that he is seeking.
	All right.
	Mr. Gillen, I'll allow maybe this question one more, but I think you are asking it in a different way, and I'll ask you to stick to the point.
	Now, as of May the 30th, Answer the question that I...
	Okay, thank you, Your Honor.
	As of May the 30th, 2023, you had had sexual relations with Ms. Willis.
	Isn't that correct?
	The interrogatory, sir, asks during the course of the marriage and the period of separation.
	Excuse me.
	Your Honor, I would ask the court to direct the witness to answer my question, yes or no.
	As of May the 30th, 2023...
	Had you had sexual relations with Ms. Willis?
	Yes, Mr. Gillen, let's start with, at the higher level, whether he believes he answered it truthfully, and then we can drill down into why or why not he doesn't.
	And maybe we'll end up exactly where you left us.
	Well, again, Your Honor, the point of it is that the words matter and that we have to establish...
	What did and did not happen.
	And then he can get whatever explanation he chooses to to what apparently is a false answer.
	But I would like an answer to my question.
	And you may get one.
	I just would ask, I would like us to start at a high level before we drill down in specifics to see whether he actually contradicted that interrogatory, if I'm making sense.
	Well, the interrogatory is relatively direct and explicit.
	Sexual relationships with a person other than your spouse during the course of the marriage Including the period of separation.
	That's pretty simple.
	Sure.
	Let's see if that's something you can get him to admit.
	You did have sexual relationships with someone other than your spouse during the course of the marriage and during the period of separation, which included up to May the 30th of 2023.
	Isn't that correct, sir?
	My answer to this interrogatory is none.
	So you're saying that you did not have sexual relationships with anyone.
	Outside of your marriage, and the period of separation is during the period that you're answering the question to this interrogatory, correct, sir?
	I'm saying during the course of my marriage, I did not have sexual relations to anyone, and this answer is no.
	Well, again, Your Honor, we need a yes or no.
	Let's just get down to it.
	Did you or did you not, by May the 30th, 2023, have had sexual relations?
	With Ms. Willis, yes or no?
	Yes or no?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Now, what you did is you answered no to that question, didn't you?
	Or none, correct?
	I didn't answer no to the question you just asked.
	I answered no to the interrogatory question.
	And the interrogatory stands that you answered as a pleading in a civil proceeding your divorce case, right?
	Yes.
	Now, excuse me.
	The next interrogatory...
	Let's move there.
	That interrogatory states as follows.
	Identify any and all occasions in which you entertain a member of the opposite sex other than your spouse who is not related to you by blood or marriage.
	You see that?
	Now, there are two parts to this.
	The second part is I read on, or in which a member of the opposite sex, other than your spouse, not related to you, by blood or marriage, entertains you.
	And then it goes on to say, including but not limited to dining, drinking, in restaurants, bars, pubs, hotels.
	You see that, correct?
	I do.
	May the 30th, 2023, when you filed this interrogatory, you had, in fact, entertained Ms. Willis on many occasions, had you not?
	Again, during the course of the marriage.
	The marriage was irretrievably broken in 2015.
	The answer is still no.
	Let's read what the interrogatory says about the time period required to answer the interrogatory.
	Because what it says is...
	It goes on to say, including but not limited to dining and or drinking at any restaurants, bars, pubs, hotels, or persons' homes from the date of marriage to the present.
	Do you understand what the word present means?
	I do.
	And present means the filing on May the 30th, 2023.
	Isn't that right?
	It is.
	So as of May the 30th, 2023, You had done a lot of entertaining of Ms. Willis, had you not?
	I had done some, yes.
	And in fact, under your testimony, you would have said that she had also entertained you.
	Isn't that correct?
	Yes.
	And so your answer to this interrogatory is false, is it not, sir?
	No, it's not false.
	Well, I hate to dance around.
	The answer is yes, you did entertain Miss Willis, correct?
	Right?
	Yes.
	She's not your spouse at that time or any time, correct?
	Yes, I did entertain somebody, correct?
	During the course I think we've made a point.
	I think it speaks for itself.
	I'll just follow up with one quick question.
	Do you understand what the word present means?
	I think we did cover that already as well.
	Okay.
	Now, what has happened from the time that you file this court document in May of 2023, Let's go over some of the things that you had been involved in in terms of being entertained or entertaining.
	Prior to your filing on the answer on the interrogatories on May 30, 2023, we've already established, have we not, that you had paid for a Royal Caribbean cruise to the Bahamas with Ms. Willis, correct?
	Yes, sir, with Ms. Willis and my mother.
	Well, your mother's not part of this interrogatory.
	I'm talking about Ms. Willis, okay?
	So, you paid and caused to be paid approximately $3,335 on that trip, Bahamas trip, from October the 28th through October the 31st, correct?
	Yeah, no objection.
	I think we've checked this ground several times already.
	Mr. Yellen, let's cover new ground.
	Well, I am trying to establish with specificity the things that he had done to entertain or be entertained prior to May the 30th, 2023.
	I'll try to move through it quickly.
	Sure.
	Well, that's already part of the record in terms of his prior testimony, and so if you want to link those two things together, you can do that during an argument.
	Well, so let me discuss this.
	You indicated that during the course of your explanation concerning the police trip, Ms. Willis paid you all that money back in cash, remember?
	Yes, sir.
	Now, the police trip had just happened, hadn't it?
	That occurred in March 18, 2023, right?
	Yes, sir.
	So, you're filing this maybe two months after you have gone to Belize with Ms. Willis, correct?
	Again, I believe all of this is our...
	I think you might be getting somewhere new.
	We'll see.
	Yes, sir.
	So, we've got the trip to Belize on March the 18th, 2023.
	You and Miss Willis, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	Now, two months later, you follow the interrogatories that speak for themselves that we've gone over a few minutes ago, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	Now, March the 18th, 2023, to state the obvious, is before.
	Excuse me, May the 30th, 2023.
	Would you agree with me on that?
	I do.
	Okay.
	So, then you tell us that Ms. Willis paid you in cash all the money for the entire trip.
	It was a gift for you for your birthday, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	And I'm sure you probably have the deposit slips where you took the cash and deposited the cash into your account, don't you?
	I did not deposit the cash into my account.
	You don't have a single...
	Solitary deposit slip to corroborate or support any of your allegations that you were paid by Mrs. Willis in cash, do you?
	No, sir.
	Not a single solitary one.
	Not a one.
	Now, when Mrs. Willis would pay you in cash, would you scamper down to the ATM with her and she drew money out of her account to pay you these thousands of dollars?
	Mr. Wade does.
	I object to the phrasing, the argumentative nature of the question.
	On that issue overall.
	Did you and Ms. Wade scamper down to the ATM machine and have her dry out?
	For example, on the Belize trip, just on your payment would have been $2,794?
	Ms. Wade?
	Ms. Wade and I didn't go to Belize.
	No, I'm just kidding, Ms. Willis.
	I'm sorry.
	Did you go down to the ATM with Ms. Willis while she drew out $2,794 to pay you in cash?
	Did you go to the ATM with her?
	No, sir.
	She didn't go to the ATM.
	She carried the cash.
	Oh, and so she would give you the cash.
	Did you have a little place in your house where you just stack up all this cash that you apparently got to repay you for these benefits that you bestowed on her?
	Mr. Gilliam, if I answered that, I'm putting myself in jeopardy.
	If I tell the world that I have cash someplace in my home, don't you think that could be problematic?
	No, I don't.
	I want an answer as to whether or not you have a little cash work in your house where you have allegedly taken the money that you got from Mrs. Willis and went and put it somewhere.
	Where'd you put it?
	No, sir.
	Now, just put it on the hip and kind of walk around money?
	Did I put it on my hip?
	Yeah, just walking around money where you would spend the cash yourself?
	Let me finish.
	Did I put it on my hip in Belize and walk around with it?
	When you got paid back, would you take the money, the cash that she gave you, and would you just carry it around with you for spending money around town?
	So, we have to break down each trip because, for example, for the cruise, she paid me the money before we took the cruise.
	I was here, and I could put the money in my pocket or put it away wherever I wanted to do with it.
	Other trips, she would give me the money.
	So at that point, I could either spend it or put it in my pocket or put it in the hotel seat.
	There's no special place that you would have all this cash that you would be getting from her that you've told us about to pay back for the benefits that you have bestowed on her?
	The only special place that they cash would have gone would have been to one of my children.
	Okay.
	Now, are you aware?
	Have you discussed these pleadings with Ms. Willis?
	No, sir.
	So there's been no discussion between you and Ms. Willis about the allegation concerning the benefits that you have bestowed on her.
	Is that correct?
	I don't think that's an accurate reflection of the testimony, and I don't think that's an appropriate question.
	I think it's overruled.
	You can answer the question.
	Okay.
	When you said proceedings, are you talking about divorce proceedings because we were talking about the interrogatories?
	To that question, the answer is no.
	Go ahead.
	I'm sorry.
	Go ahead with your answer.
	I'll hear the complete answer, and then I'll follow up.
	Okay.
	If you're asking me about this...
	Hearing the proceedings of this hearing, have we discussed the financial peace based upon Mr. Roman's motion?
	Yes.
	So you have discussed the financial peace.
	When did that discussion take place?
	Were you other people there or were you in this world discussing this about?
	What your position is going to be.
	The relevance has to do with suddenly we have a declaration from Mr. Wade in this case where he says roughly equal and then shows one alleged payment by Ms. Willis.
	No mention of cash.
	None.
	So I need to find out a little bit more about how suddenly we have this revelation about cash.
	From the witness stand today.
	So with our company, Bill, when you say no mention of cash, if I provided one receipt that didn't amount to what you would think was roughly equal, the rest of it is cash.
	Well, did you in your declaration, sir, it was filed in this case, did you tell the court?
	In that declaration, that the expenditure that you had provided on behalf of Ms. Willis was paid for back by her in cash, yes or no?
	I believe that I did when I said that the expenses were split roughly evenly.
	If you could point to me any place in your affidavit.
	Were you to use the word cash, I would appreciate it.
	I didn't use the word cash, no sir.
	No, you didn't use the word cash, did you?
	But I didn't say that she didn't give it to me in cash.
	No, you just didn't tell anybody that you allegedly got paid back in cash, right?
	No, I told everyone who asked.
	Today.
	Yes, sir.
	Who else was with you, if anyone else, when you and Ms. Willis were discussing how you would be handling the financial component of the motion here today?
	That is the personal benefits.
	I'm going to object to the relevance of that, Your Honor.
	The relevance is if they know that they're going to be called as witnesses, they've been subpoenaed, and they are discussing what they're going to say.
	We need to know that.
	The court needs to know that.
	It goes to the veracity of Mr. Willis and Mr. Wade.
	We didn't discuss how we were going to handle testimony.
	My question was, when you were discussing with Ms. Willis in the conference room, when you were discussing what...
	You perceived to be the situation concerning the benefits for the payments.
	Yes, sir.
	Was there anyone else present?
	No, sir.
	How long did the meeting take?
	Probably five or ten minutes.
	Did Ms. Willis tell you what she was going to say?
	No, sir.
	Did you ask her whether she had any bank withdrawals that would corroborate the assertion that...
	That she would pay you back in large sums of cash for these trips to the Caribbean, Belize, California, on and on and on.
	Your Honor, I can object.
	The proffer of when the last relevant suggestion was made was that Mr. Dillon needed to know who else was there.
	These could be potential witnesses that he could pass exam, and that question hasn't answered.
	I think he's still exploring possible bias or motive to shape his testimony, so overall on that ground.
	Thank you.
	Now, Mr. Willis, excuse me, Mr. Wade, when you were having this discussion, did you ask her, did you ask Ms. Willis, do you have anything to support these cash withdrawals?
	No, sir.
	Did you ask her where she got the cash?
	This is the conversation.
	I produced my credit card statement that showed what Ms. Merchant in her filing.
	Okay, so when she would pay you back in cash, were you aware of what her financial situation was?
	Do you know it?
	No, sir.
	Well, Your Honor is rolling because we've been bombarded with a book.
	Find Me the Votes, in which...
	What's an issue is the financial benefit, and if that plays a material interest in an actual conflict of interest, so I think that's relevant.
	Thank you.
	Now, have you read the book Find Me the Votes?
	I have.
	You have?
	I have.
	Okay.
	Now, in that book, Ms. Willis is telling the authors about how financially destitute she was, So, let me qualify the response.
	I've read the book in parts.
	I haven't had the time to sit and read the book in its entirety.
	Did you read that part about how she's telling the authors about how, uh, Little money she had and how financially she was in bad shape when she was running.
	Did you read that part?
	No, sir.
	Did you ever have discussions with Ms. Willis about her financial situation, which was apparently in rough shape prior to her being elected DA?
	No, sir.
	Ms. Willis made it clear that her financial business was just that.
	It was her business.
	I know nothing about her financial status.
	I know nothing about how she was faring before or after the election or even now.
	I know nothing about her finances.
	You're telling us that she didn't share that with you but chose to share it with the authors of a book that's been published and printed and sold nationally.
	I think that's a fair question for Cross.
	I don't know that she shared it with the author.
	I don't know that the author is telling the truth.
	I don't know the author, so I don't know.
	Okay.
	Now, did you give an interview to the authors of that book?
	I've given no interviews, sir.
	So you haven't talked to them at all?
	I haven't talked to any media.
	All right.
	Now, as it relates to the...
	I'd like to, though.
	As it relates to...
	So, again, from your bank records that you're aware of, there'll be no cash deposits, right?
	I didn't say that.
	Are there cash deposits which line up with the money that you have allegedly received from Ms. Willis to, quote, pay you back for her part of the trips?
	So, here's the thing.
	In my bank records, you will see cash deposits.
	You will see check deposits.
	I can't say that you look through the bank records and you won't see cash deposits because I have two sources of income, sir.
	Income comes from my private practice, my firm, and income comes from the contract here with Fulton County.
	During the course of private practice, occasionally I will have occasion to...
	Deposit cash into my account.
	In preparation for this hearing and your testimony, did you go through your bank records to find out if you could locate any cash deposits that would corroborate your testimony?
	No, sir.
	I didn't go through my bank records at all.
	Now, so what you would do, the money that you received Of course, the money that you receive from your work for Fulton County, that's public funds, correct?
	No, sir.
	It's private funds.
	Public funds pay you to do work for Fulton County, correct?
	Tell me what the definition of a public fund is.
	A public fund would be funds, as in not fund, but funds money.
	Public money, as in money from taxpayers in Fulton County or the state of Georgia, To do the work that you're doing here in this case, yes or no?
	One or the other, I'm certain.
	Do you know which one?
	I don't know which one, no sir.
	Now, you would take those public funds, and those public funds were then used, deposited in your account, and they were then used to pay on the credit cards for the trips that you would take.
	With Ms. Willis, correct?
	I object to the question as far as the characterization of public funds.
	The witness didn't testify to that, and I don't believe there's been any evidence to that.
	Once it's paid to Ms. Wade, it's private funds.
	The point of it is that you got money...
	Mr. Gillis, rephrase it.
	Yeah, I'll rephrase it.
	Let's break it down.
	You got money from Fulton County for the work that you do here, right?
	Yes, sir.
	You would send in invoices, and they would pay you money, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	Private money, that money was money from either the citizens of Fulton County or from the state of Georgia, correct?
	That's what I mean by public funds.
	Agreed?
	I guess I'm having trouble with the notion that the citizens of Fulton County have paid me any funds.
	I'm not certain the funding source.
	I can tell you that either the state of Georgia or Fulton County has written me a check.
	So that would be, those two entities are public entities, correct?
	Yes.
	So that would be public funds, right?
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Yes.
	And those public funds are from the same source that you would then use to pay out on your On your expenses for the trips that you took Ms. Willis on, correct?
	No, sir.
	As I testified two moments ago, I have income coming in from my law firm.
	I also have income coming in from The funds that we're here discussing now from either the state of Georgia or Fulton County and or both.
	I'm not certain what it is.
	So to say that I'm paying a credit card statement with funds coming from Fulton County or the state of Georgia would not be an accurate statement because the funds could very well come from my private practice.
	What percentage of your income In 2022, came from money where you were working on this case or from your partners working for the Fulton County office?
	In 2022, I would say 50-50.
	You think 50-50 in 2022?
	Yes, sir.
	What about 2023?
	Probably 60-40.
	60-40?
	Yes, sir.
	So the money that would be in those accounts, at least 60% of those, in your view, would be public funds, that those monies were then used to pay for the expenses that you had incurred for the trips that you took Ms. Wallace on, the cruises, the Napa Valleys, the Bahamas, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	Okay.
	And now, what you did is that when you signed on in November On 1st of 2021, that's when you signed on to be counsel for the anti-corruption matters, right?
	Yes, sir.
	Now, as you know, in your engagement letter, it doesn't say that you're signing on and your scope of work is to work on the front special grand jury investigation, does it?
	No, sir.
	That you're signing on to work on anti-corruption, the anti-corruption unit matters, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	Matters with a plural, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	So in your contract, there is no specific reference to any specific case.
	Isn't that right?
	That's correct.
	Okay.
	Now, but you didn't sign on for the duration.
	There was a period you have a contract, and then it would...
	Then expire, then you would have a new contract, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	Now, of course, the extension that you received, the first one was in November of 2021, and then you filed, excuse me, there was a renewal in November the 15th of 2022.
	Is that right?
	Sounds right.
	Okay.
	Now, that was right after You got re-upped by Ms. Willis right after you took Ms. Willis to Aruba.
	Isn't that right?
	On that November the 1st, 2022 trip to Aruba and through November the 4th, 2022.
	Correct?
	What does re-up mean?
	Well, re-up means that you came back, your contract was up, and then on November the 15th, You and Aswell signed a new contract for you, right?
	Yes, sir.
	Okay.
	Now, when you were in taking her to the Aruba and on the cruises, excuse me, the resort there, did you discuss your re-upping of the signing of extension on your contract?
	No, sir.
	But you make an excellent point.
	I'm glad you pointed that out.
	The trip to Aruba, the contract was not in existence then.
	So you're saying that you were not...
	Under contract.
	In your contract, did you send any invoices in for work that you did after your first contract expired?
	No, sir.
	You didn't?
	No, sir.
	When that expired, that was it.
	So then you're saying that after the Aruba trip...
	You get re-upped with a new contract, correct?
	I signed a new contract, yes, sir.
	Now, was there any modifications on that contract?
	Did you get an extension on the cap that you were limited on the first one?
	Were there any modifications at all, Mr. Willis?
	Excuse me.
	I've done that again.
	I apologize.
	I've been called worse.
	I'm sorry.
	I've been called worse.
	Now, were there any modifications on that?
	Do you have the contract in front of you where you could...
	I don't have it in front of you, but I think that...
	Because I believe as the work gradually...
	As the time of the work gradually increased, the hourly cap would increase.
	In other words, starting out the investigation, it was impossible to anticipate.
	The level of cooperation during the course of the investigation from some of the witnesses.
	So if you assume that there would be great cooperation with the witnesses in terms of interviewing and speaking and being voluntarily speaking with you, it doesn't take as much time.
	So after getting into it...
	Realizing that most of the witnesses were not willing to speak or willing to turn over evidence or information, quickly you figure out that this is going to take a little more time than originally anticipated.
	And because of that, you have to compensate for those hours.
	And that's why there was a compensation on your extension?
	Yes, sir.
	The cap.
	Did Mrs. Willis review your invoices with you when you would submit them?
	Never.
	Did anyone ever question whether or not you worked 24 hours in one day and billed 24 hours in one day?
	I've never worked 24 hours in one day and billed 24 hours in one day.
	I'm glad you asked me that question because I'd like the opportunity to talk about that.
	I think you should go ahead.
	If you look at that invoice where it says 24 hours in one day, it actually doesn't say one day.
	If you look at the top of the invoice, it says date completed.
	The date that's reflected on that invoice reflects the date that the work was completed.
	It doesn't say when it started.
	It just says this is the date that is completed.
	So if you go through the invoices, probably around the first five or six, you'll see that that's the billing format.
	I would bill only after that particular task has been completed.
	That's why you see a 24-hour period with the one day there.
	I kind of wish some of the experts who had opined on that had called me and asked me the question.
	But there was never a billing of 24 hours in one day.
	Now, probably around the sixth or seventh invoice, you see the format change.
	I started using a range so that it got less confusing, right?
	I'm confused, so maybe you can correct me.
	In Exhibit 14, you've got down a specific date.
	Prepared cases for pretrawl.
	November the 5th, 2021, 24 hours at $250 an hour, $6,000.
	This wasn't about...
	It was about the work that you did on November the 5th, 2021.
	Look at the top of the invoice where it says date complete.
	What I want you to do, Mr. Wade, is focus on the date that you have down there and tell the court what you billed for on November the 5th, 2021.
	I thought it was already in.
	I thought 14 was in.
	Again, Mr. Gillen, it says, completed date.
	Date completed.
	The dates that you see here are the dates that that word was completed.
	So on November the 5th, I completed the task of preparing the cases for pretrial.
	That's the date I completed it.
	Just read if you would.
	And my question was, read out loud.
	The entry for November the 5th, 2021, and how many hours you billed that day.
	Just do that for me, if you would.
	I can't do that.
	Excuse me.
	I believe it's entitled to answer his question yet.
	It certainly wasn't the question that Mr. Rowland asked.
	All right.
	Well, the question now is to read a certain entry.
	Just read into the record, Mr. Wade, on November the 5th, 2021, how many hours did you bill the citizens of Fulton County for on that day?
	Just read it out, please.
	I completed the task on November 5, 2021.
	24 hours was billed at $250.
	You talked about your relationship with Miss Willis, and your testimony is that it began in 2022.
	Do you remember that testimony?
	No, sir.
	Our relationship began in 2022.
	Your romantic relationship began in 2022?
	Yes, sir.
	That's your testimony?
	Yes sir.
	Okay, now, when you were re-upped on this On the second contract, you had a romantic relationship already established with Ms. Willis, yes or no?
	In 2022?
	On November the 15th, 2022, you had a romantic relationship with Ms. Willis.
	I signed the second contract, yes sir.
	Answer my question, please.
	I'm not going to use the word re-up.
	On the re-up or whatever you want to call it, your contract on November the 15th, 2022, you had a romantic relationship already existing with Ms. Willis.
	Yes or no?
	I signed the contract.
	The second contract, yes, sir, during the course of a romantic relationship.
	Yes or no?
	You had a romantic relationship with her at the time that you signed up the extension on November the 15th, 2022.
	Yes or no?
	The answer to that question is yes.
	Thank you.
	Now, this was before the Special Purpose Grand Jury released a report.
	Isn't that correct?
	Correct?
	Are you asking me if it's before the work was completed or before the Special Purpose Grand Jury actually released the report?
	Your relationship with Ms. Willis already existed when the special purpose grand jury released its report, correct?
	At the time the report was released, yes, sir.
	But you understand that the report, the work had been completed prior to the release of the report.
	You understand that?
	And your relationship with Ms. Willis, of course, was prior to the indictment in this case, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	Your Honor, if I may just ask my folks over here whether there's anything I need to clean up on.
	That's all the questions, Your Honor, I have.
	Thank you.
	Your Honor, I do have questions.
	I think we went through.
	No, I had asked him for permission, but he was going to go first on this, and then I was going to follow up.
	That's the affirmation.
	Allow him to go first.
	That's what I thought I had.
	All right, let me...
	All right, with the understanding next time, we're going to keep going in order, and I'm just getting around the order.
	All right.
	That's why I brought it up, because I thought that's...
	Okay.
	All right.
	Mr. Sena.
	I'm going to try to keep my questions very specific.
	Yes, sir.
	And I'm going to also, of course, try not to go back into specific questions that have already been asked.
	Okay?
	Yes, sir.
	When did your relationship with Ms. Willis end?
	2023.
	Can you give us an approximation of not by date, but by month?
	Summer 2023.
	Forgive me.
	I'm a man.
	We don't do the date thing.
	Summer of 23, I would say June, maybe.
	Using the euphemism personal relationship, did you have any personal relationship at all with Ms. Willis after the summer of 2023?
	I want to make sure that I'm answering your question.
	Let me rephrase, if I might.
	The way it has been characterized in, for example, the response of the state, and I believe in your affidavit, is there's a difference between a personal relationship and a professional relationship.
	Correct?
	Yes, sir.
	I'm not talking about a professional relationship.
	I'm talking about a personal relationship.
	Have you had a personal relationship at all?
	And you know what I mean by that.
	After the summer of 2023.
	Are you asking me if I had intercourse with the disciplinary?
	I was trying not to, but I guess if you're going to characterize it as that, the answer would be no.
	So it's been purely professional since the summer of 2023.
	So that's where we're having issues.
	You'll have to explain because I don't know what the issue would be.
	No.
	I will explain to you.
	Thank you.
	You say personal.
	We're very good friends.
	Probably closer than ever because of these attacks.
	But if you're asking me about specific intercourse, the answer is no.
	How about if I change it from intercourse to romantic?
	No.
	Okay.
	During the direct examination, You made a statement, at least I believe I heard it correctly, that your personal relationship, and now I'm talking about that characterized sexual romantic relationship, was not a secret.
	Is that correct?
	Wait.
	If you're asking me if people knew that we were having sex, no, they didn't.
	I'm asking you whether people knew that you were dating.
	Whether you were romantically involved.
	You said that it was not a secret.
	Oh, it wasn't a secret.
	It was just private.
	My mother knew, obviously.
	Okay.
	Did anyone in the district attorney's office that has worked on this case know that you were dating or had a romantic relationship with district attorney Willis?
	I don't know what they knew.
	Well, did you tell anyone?
	No.
	Do you have any knowledge of whether Ms. Willis revealed it to anyone?
	I have no clue.
	Okay.
	So as far as you know, as far as you know from personal knowledge, no one in the DA's team knew, correct?
	That's correct.
	Okay.
	So if it was a legitimate relationship, is there any particular reason why it was kept secret or private?
	It wasn't kept secret.
	It was kept private.
	And the purpose for that was?
	It's what we chose to do.
	I'm asking you why, though, not just because you chose.
	If you're dating someone, why keep it private?
	So, a few reasons.
	The first one is, and I want to say this respectfully in the right way, there are some people who are in the public eye who just don't like it, don't wish to be there.
	I have tried to have lunch or dinner with her publicly, and I can't count the number of people.
	That would approach the table or would accost us as we were trying to walk into a restaurant and just have lunch or have a meal.
	It is not secret.
	It is private.
	We don't want the world asking questions or interrupting that time.
	So we weren't trying to keep anything a secret, Mr. Sedan.
	There's nothing secret or salacious about having it.
	A private life.
	Nothing.
	I'm not suggesting that there was.
	I'm asking the questions.
	When you went on the various trips that had been outlined by both Mr. Gillen and by Ms. Merchant, did anyone in the district attorney's office know that the two of you were traveling on personal trips together?
	To my knowledge, Mr. Sadow, no.
	And again, that was for privacy, according to your testimony.
	Privacy, yes, sir.
	Okay.
	Did you and Miss Willis go to the Hapeville condo prior to your relationship starting beginning of 2022?
	Prior to having Physical contact, prior to having intercourse, did we go to the Hapeville condo?
	Again, you keep going to intercourse.
	I'm trying not to, but fine.
	The answer to that, my question would be yes.
	Did you and Ms. Willis go to the Hapeville condo prior to, what I want to say, November 1st of 2021?
	Yes.
	And the purpose for going to the Hapeville condo with Ms. Willis prior to 2021 would have been what?
	Or prior to November 1 of 2021?
	Could have been any number of things, because at that time...
	That's what I'm asking, so tell me.
	Yeah, could have been any number of things, because at that time, she had a friend living in that condo.
	Miss Yeri lived in that condo.
	Okay.
	Maybe it was my question was poorly worded.
	Let me try again.
	Your answer is yes, prior to November 1st of 2021, you would have gone to the Hapeville condo and been there with Ms. Willis, correct?
	Yes.
	And you would have been there, as you indicated, for many reasons, right?
	Yes.
	Can you give me, just list a few of the reasons?
	Ms. Yurdy resided there, went to visit her, maybe went to talk about.
	A document that I received.
	You would go to the condo and talk about a document that you received?
	Absolutely.
	Okay, go ahead.
	Absolutely.
	Any other reasons?
	None come to mind.
	None come to mind?
	No, sir.
	And would you say that was frequent?
	When I say frequent, do you think prior to November 1st of 2021, you were at the condo more than 10 times?
	No, sir.
	So it would be less than 10 times?
	Yes, sir.
	So if phone records were to reflect that you were making phone calls from the same location as the condo before November 1st of 2021, and it was on multiple occasions, the phone records would be wrong?
	If phone records reflected that, yes, sir.
	They'd be wrong.
	They'd be wrong.
	Okay.
	Where did you live during that time period?
	The same place I live now.
	Which is not in Haightville, correct?
	It is not in Haightville.
	It is north of Atlanta, the city of Atlanta, correct?
	It is.
	Okay.
	And any other reasons why you would be in the Hapeville area on multiple occasions prior to November 1st of 2021?
	Let's see.
	The Porsche Experience is there.
	I'm sorry?
	The Porsche Experience is there.
	Okay, so that would have been one.
	Any other reason?
	Yes, sir.
	The airport is there.
	Airport in Hapeville.
	Yes, sir.
	Delta Airlines is the headquarters there.
	Let's see.
	Rest for us there.
	If that's your recollection, that's fine.
	I'm not asking you to try to remember everything.
	Did you discuss your affidavit filed in connection with the response with Ms. Willis?
	No, sir.
	Did you know, personal knowledge, whether Ms. Willis reviewed your affidavit before it was included with the response?
	I have no clue.
	So, as far as you know, personal knowledge, Ms. Willis did not know what you said in the affidavit.
	I didn't give it to her.
	That's what I said.
	You have no personal knowledge.
	No personal knowledge.
	And as far as you know, no one else has told you that she did or didn't.
	I hadn't asked anyone.
	We've kind of worked this up a little bit, and the numbers could be off.
	But according to our numbers, $10,000, give or take, would have been reflected on your credit card statements in connection with things.
	Potential benefit to Ms. Willis, okay?
	I want you just to assume that.
	Assuming that there was $10,000 that you had on your credit cards, is it your testimony that Ms. Willis paid you back $10,000 in cash?
	Can I object that the characterization of $10,000 for Ms. Willis's travel, I don't believe, is an accurate reflection of what the numbers of these are, the summary that I've been provided by the defense.
	I think that's joint travel.
	Is that right, Mr. Seder on side?
	No, it's not joint travel.
	But all I'm trying to understand, I'll rephrase, because I don't want to get bogged down on specific numbers.
	You would have received thousands of dollars in cash from Ms. Willis, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	Okay.
	And the thousands of dollars in cash from Ms. Willis...
	Do you know, I'm not asking you whether she took it out of her pocketbook or she took it out of a suitcase.
	I'm saying, do you know the source of the cash?
	Just that, out of her pocketbook.
	You don't know where she obtained the cash?
	I didn't ask her.
	And the whole time that she was paying you in cash, you never said, hey, why do you have this amount of cash?
	Mr. Seda, in my practice, people come into my...
	Law firm, all the time with cash.
	I never question where they got it.
	Yeah, but we're talking not about people that come into your law firm.
	We're talking about the district attorney of Fulton County, who I'm assuming receives a paycheck.
	She doesn't get paid in cash.
	So, just like you assume, I assume she got it from her paycheck.
	I don't know.
	Okay.
	But of course, it's already been, and I'm not going to go back into it.
	You've not seen any records indicating withdrawals of cash from Ms. Willis at all.
	Why would I ask her?
	I didn't ask her.
	All I said is you haven't, right?
	No, sir.
	Okay.
	Now, can you...
	Can you explain why you filed for divorce one day after you were hired by Ms. Willis?
	You filed on November 2nd of 2021.
	You're hired on November 1st of 2021.
	Why the day after?
	You mean one day before?
	You filed for divorce one day after.
	You were hired, right?
	Okay.
	I'll answer your question.
	Okay, please.
	So in 2015, when my wife had the affair, we had a conversation that we were divorced right then.
	Again, the better practice, at least for my children at the time, was to stay in place until the youngest could graduate.
	And matriculate into college.
	We did that.
	When she graduated, matriculated into college.
	At the time, my wife had moved back and forth to Houston, to Texas.
	So she's in Texas.
	We take our child off to college.
	We come back to Georgia for a brief period of time.
	Divorce gets filed.
	She gets served.
	There we go.
	Now, the reason that date was selected...
	Yes, sir.
	That's what I asked.
	The specific reason that that specific date was selected was because she was only in town.
	And why do you have the right to object on his behalf for attorney plan privilege?
	Because...
	All right, there we go.
	And...
	I believe that he's already attempted to answer this question, and there was no privilege raised.
	So he's given a partial answer, and now he's about to finish that.
	So first of all, I don't think it's covered by attorney-client privilege, and I'll deal with that if you want me to.
	But otherwise, he's already answered part of it.
	So he doesn't get to say, now I'm going to stop.
	Well, it was a long preface, but I don't think it ever actually got to what might have been an issue there.
	So if you can lay the foundation, we'll deal with the objection.
	Take a step back.
	You realize that an attorney-client privilege is the privilege of the client, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	And you, in connection with your representation, at least it's been proper to the court by Mr. Bradley, that it's up to you to decide whether you want to raise the privilege, right?
	Yes, sir.
	It's not up to Mr. Bradley.
	Yes, sir.
	So you have the power, in order to get to the truth of the matter, you have the power to waive the attorney-client privilege, do you not?
	I believe that's an appropriate question.
	The privilege is there.
	Whether he uses it or not, it doesn't matter why.
	I think if we're trying to get to the answer to your question, let's figure out whether it covers the question you were trying to get to.
	If I may finish.
	And your position is you have no intention of waiving your attorney-client privilege, correct?
	That's correct.
	So now, can you answer the question why you waited until November 2nd, the day after you were hired by Ms. Willis to file for divorce?
	I can.
	So, again, Jocelyn had relocated to Texas, and she had been in Texas for months.
	She was only here for...
	A brief period of time to drive my daughter's car back with her.
	And when she came here to do that, I was able to then get her served.
	Okay, so your answer as to why you waited until the day after you were hired by Miss Willis, which would be November 1st, 2021, to file the complaint for the divorce on November 2nd, 2021.
	Your testimony under oath is because your wife was here, but had not been here in October, had not been here in September, had not been here in August of 2021.
	She had been in Texas taking care of her ailing mother and an aging father.
	So the first opportunity that I had after speaking with my lawyers, To take care of that was the date it was filed and served because she happened to be here.
	It had nothing to do with...
	That was purely coincidental, that contract.
	I understand it's purely coincidence, your testimony.
	Yes, sir.
	And understand that this was by agreement between she and I, she being my wife and I, that we were divorced when the children matriculated out, and that there would actually have been an agreement attached to The filing,
	it became apparent that the agreement wasn't going to happen, and things got a little contentious, so that's when the privilege would kick in, and I was supposed to do it when I did it.
	So, if I understood correctly, again, you tell me if I'm wrong.
	Is it your testimony that your wife was not In Atlanta, Georgia, or the metro area, throughout October of 2021?
	No.
	In October of 2021, she was back and forth between here and Texas.
	So she was, at least on some occasions, in the Atlanta area.
	But that was during the time when we were working through the consent agreement that fell through.
	Okay, I think we're pretty far afield on relevance.
	The answer to the question about the timing of the divorce filing.
	Understood, Ms. Cross.
	Ms. Cato, where are we going from here?
	We're about to finish this area since I'm not going to be able to go any further about.
	If we want to call the X, we'll call the X for that purpose.
	Well, we'll have to discuss whether that's a collateral issue altogether.
	No, I'm just saying if.
	I didn't say we will.
	Okay.
	All right, so.
	You said that you were aware of the contracts that Mr. Bradley and Mr. Campbell had with the Fulton County District Attorney's Office, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	And how did you become aware of those?
	Just through conversation.
	Conversation with who?
	Mr. Bradley and Mr. Campbell.
	So you were discussing matters with Mr. Bradley which were not related to attorney-client privilege, correct?
	Related to the contracts, yes.
	Okay, but you were having conversations that would not...
	Even though, if I understood correctly, Mr. Bradley was your attorney at the time, correct?
	At what time?
	At the time that Mr. Bradley received his contract from Fulton County, which would have been the beginning of January or in January of 2021, right?
	Is that the date of his contract?
	Pretty close.
	I don't know what the date of his contract was, but if it was after the date of the filing of divorce...
	I'm not talking about after the date of the filing of the divorce.
	It's been represented to the court that you had an attorney-client relationship with Mr. Bradley from 2015 forward, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	That is correct.
	When Mr. Bradley received his contract with Fulton County, that was in 2021, correct?
	I don't know.
	We can prove that through other candidates.
	But at the time that Mr. Bradley was doing work for Fulton County, if I understand, you still had an attorney-client privilege, at least you're claiming one, with Mr. Bradley, correct?
	Yes.
	So when you talked to Mr. Bradley about matters with his contract in Fulton County, those were not covered by your attorney-client privilege, correct?
	They were not.
	Okay, and that meant that not all communications with Mr. Bradley were covered by attorney-client privilege, correct?
	Well, those certainly weren't.
	My question was, not all communications with Mr. Bradley were covered by, at least as you've been represented to the court, by the attorney-client privilege, correct?
	Those communications were not.
	So there were communications outside of the attorney-client privilege, correct?
	Mr. Bradley.
	If you're asking me if I ever communicate with him outside of the attorney-client privilege, the answer is yes.
	I've communicated with him outside of the tournament.
	Let's finish this up.
	Did you call it Roman No.
	4?
	Defense.
	In defense exhibit No.
	4, And Mr. Gilman went over with you your responses to certain interrogatories on May the 30th, 2023.
	Remember that?
	Yes, sir.
	Not going back into those, the words interrogatories are already in evidence, so we're not going to do that.
	But the ones that we've gone into, there were two of them.
	And your answer to both of those was none, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	Okay.
	Now, on January 25th of 2024, you again were in a position that you answered those same interrogatories, the two that we're talking about.
	I get specific if we need to, but as long as we understand we're talking about the same two, right?
	Yes, sir.
	And they are in defense exhibit number six, and they are interrogatories number four and number five.
	Okay.
	No, I want you to be able to see it.
	So it's defense exhibit number six.
	I'm told that you have six.
	Okay.
	Here we are.
	You would agree with me that in defense exhibit number six, and we're talking about interrogatories of January 25, 2024.
	Yes, sir.
	That as to interrogatory number four, that's the same interrogatory, same words that were in the interrogatory that Mr. Gillen went over, which was dated May 30th of 2023, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	In your original response, In defense exhibit number six was none, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	Your updated response was the plaintiff declines to respond to this interrogatory and asserts his privilege pursuant to OCGA section 24-5-505, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	You know that 24-5-505 breaks down into two Privileges, right?
	Which is why I'm specific.
	I said I asserted the privacy privilege.
	Well, that's what I'm asking you.
	In your updated response, there's no reference to privacy, correct?
	Yes, there is.
	In the code section, 24-5-505.
	Okay, but it also...
	Reference to privacy.
	Just go with me, okay?
	That code section says, does it not, no party or witness shall be required...
	To testify as to any matter which may incriminate or tend to incriminate such party or witness or which shall tend to bring infamy, disgrace, or public contempt upon such party or witness.
	You'd agree with that, right?
	I'm not reading it.
	I'm sorry?
	I'm not reading it.
	I don't have it in front of me.
	If I may.
	I can take judicial notice.
	That is what the rule says if you want to ask him any follow-up questions.
	Okay, thank you.
	You are not claiming that your answer to number four, interrogatory number four, on January 25th, 2024, incriminates you, that is, as in Fifth Amendment privilege, right?
	That's correct.
	You're claiming the second part, that it would...
	Bring infamy, disgrace, or public contempt.
	Correct?
	I'm going to object to that.
	I don't think that's the whole thing.
	And also, the witness doesn't have it in front of him.
	Sorry about how he could respond to that.
	I think he's said several times, privacy is why he invokes that statute.
	No rule.
	I'm claiming privacy.
	The privilege that you make reference to is to infamy, disgrace, or public contempt upon the witness.
	Right?
	Or party.
	That's the section that you were relying on.
	Correct?
	If that's what it says, yes, sir.
	I could show you, but I think the court has already indicated he can take judicial notice of the statute.
	So assume that what I'm telling you is accurate, okay?
	Yes, sir.
	How would an answer of none bring infamy, disgrace, or public contempt upon you?
	So, as I explained in direct of Mr. Roman's counsel, The minute she elected to intervene into my divorce proceeding, I then started to understand the bigger picture, which was that all the attorneys in the election interference case were colluding with Joycelyn's divorce lawyer.
	And because of that, I said, privacy.
	I don't want my divorce proceeding to bleed into this criminal proceeding.
	I just...
	Didn't want that.
	So you raised a privilege, if I understand, that indicated that your answer would bring infamy, disgrace, or public contempt upon you.
	Right?
	I'm going to object to the relevance of this nasty answer.
	Mr. Seda, where are we heading with this?
	I think I can finish that up by saying you didn't say none again.
	You asserted a privilege, correct?
	That's correct.
	And you did the same thing, did you not?
	With number five.
	That's correct.
	That is, you didn't say none again, right?
	Is the answer to the interrogatory number four, as you have it in front of you, is the answer none?
	Is that the truth?
	The answer is, to that interrogatory, is as I placed it at the time I responded, sir.
	I'm asking you now, is the answer to that interrogatory none?
	The answer is still privilege.
	So he's apparently electing to apply the same privilege, Mr. Sedal, to that exact same question.
	And I have a case which indicates that we can get beyond that if the court deems that appropriate.
	And to what end?
	To what end?
	That the privilege actually does not apply and he must answer the question.
	And where does that get us?
	He answers the question.
	Has he already kind of said everything he has to say about?
	The nature of the relationship, how long it lasts, what does it end?
	No, I think it would prove...
	I think if he is forced or compelled to answer the question, he will either answer it falsely by saying none, or he answers it truthfully by saying yes, and then telling us what it is.
	That's what I believe.
	That's why I'm asking.
	The interrogator you're referring to, though, the question contained there...
	Two interrogators, yes, sir.
	It's the entertaining one, it's whether there were other relationships, right?
	With a specific language that's in the interrogatories.
	Sure.
	Haven't you already covered that in all the other questions that we've had so far?
	We have, but again, the court could, if I could require a compelling answer from him as to whether his answer would still be none, then we would know whether or not he was telling the truth now.
	If the answer is no, then obviously there was a time in the past where he was not.
	It simply requires him to now answer under oath what he refused to answer and claimed, what I might suggest is a bogus privilege, and that you can pierce that privilege because it's a material fact in connection with this case.
	Again, it's a call that Your Honor makes.
	I have the case law that says you can do that, but it's your discretion.
	Ms. Cross?
	Your Honor, Mr. Mason, I'm standing now for several hours.
	It's been asked and answered very personal questions that cover the issues.
	It's probably an argument to make later to the court and not a question to propound.
	So as I see it, the only relevance these interrogatories have to this case really whatsoever would be as either prior inconsistent or consistent statements.
	And to that end, I think the question has been put to him again and again and again.
	He's answered how he believes he felt his answer should be and why he answered a certain way.
	And as it goes to credibility, I think at this point we're arguing weight, and I don't really see the value in pushing this issue further.
	Just for the record, the case that I was going to refer to is State versus Wakefield at 324 Georgia appeal 587, and specifically, let's see, it would be 590.
	In which they talk about this specific privilege.
	This is a 2013 case.
	And then they footnote to number three.
	And footnote three says, there are times when the materiality of the evidence outweighs the testimonial privilege.
	And it goes and explains what that is.
	That's what I'm reading.
	And I see what you're saying, that we could say that.
	You need to answer the question regardless of the privilege you asserted.
	At this point, though, I think we've covered that ground and we're ready to move on.
	Okay.
	Based on that, I have nothing else.
	Thank you.
	Okay.
	Mr. McCullough, anything?
	On behalf of Mr. Floyd.
	Moving through defense.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	No, no, no.
	I'm looking behind you.
	Mr. McCullough, on behalf of Mr. Floyd.
	He's elbowing you, sir.
	Okay.
	Mr. Cromwell.
	All right.
	Ms. Cross.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Mr. Wade, have you still got exhibit number 14 in front of you?
	The one with all of the invoices, I believe.
	I believe I have them all.
	All right.
	So you were asked, Mr. Wade, about a couple of the invoice items, and your testimony, I think, was that the percentage of income Special counsel appointment in November 2021.
	The percentage of your income roughly after that time was about 50-50, Fulton versus other income from your law practice, correct?
	Correctly, yes ma 'am.
	Sometimes more, sometimes less?
	Yes ma 'am.
	How about your time?
	I'm interested in the percentage of your time from November 2021.
	Let's say the close of the Special Purpose Grand Jury when it was dissolved in January 2023.
	Can you estimate for us the percentage of your time that was spent on Fulton County work versus other work?
	Oh gosh.
	99.1.
	99% of the time here in this building working on this case.
	All right.
	It was, as I understood your testimony, it was an intense period in terms of hours while that special purpose grand jury was meeting, correct?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And who was head or manager of the election integrity case during that time for the district attorney's office?
	I was.
	You were coordinating the efforts?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And those efforts included not just the proceedings that were happening in this building, correct?
	That's correct.
	We don't need to go all through it, but...
	Is your representation that 99.9% of the time was restricted to 2022?
	99% of your professional working time was devoted to this case?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And the remainder, whatever it was, was to some of your other cases that were ongoing?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	All right.
	2022, I want to focus on that a little bit because if we are looking at, I believe, the financial affidavits, do you have those in front of you as well?
	I do.
	Financial affidavit that was filed in your divorce case in January 2022.
	You estimated your monthly income at that time was $14,000 a month, right?
	In 22?
	January 22. Yes, ma 'am.
	January 23, what did that number come to?
	$9,000.
	What about 2024?
	I don't know.
	Is that there in front of you?
	That's not one of the ones that's there in front of you?
	No, ma 'am.
	As reflected in those financial affidavits, your income decreased as a result of your work in this case, correct?
	Significant.
	The structure of your firm, we talked a lot about that and I don't want to go through it anymore than we need to, but 2022, the structure of your firm changed.
	Is that correct?
	That's correct.
	In the early part of 2022, there were three of you.
	You and Mr. Campbell and Mr. Bradley, you split expenses.
	Is that right?
	That's correct.
	And you profit shared among yourselves, correct?
	Correct.
	After Mr. Bradley left the firm, then there were just two of you, correct?
	That is the cause of the significant change.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	So now you have two people bringing in income, correct?
	Correct.
	And one of those people, you, is spending almost all of your time devoted to...
	This election integrity case, correct?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And your income from this election integrity case is less than what it was the year before?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	We talked about the monthly cap.
	We didn't talk about it.
	There was talk about the monthly cap that was included in your contracts, indicating there was a certain threshold that...
	You could reach number hours a month, and over that amount, you were not going to be compensated, correct?
	That's correct.
	All right.
	And you kind of smiled when you said that.
	That's a little bittersweet there, isn't it?
	That's bitter, bitter.
	All right.
	Exhibit 14, is that still there in front of you?
	It is.
	I want you to take a look, please.
	That's a collection of exhibits that includes all of your invoices, as was represented.
	I want you to take a look at invoice number nine.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Is that there in front of you?
	I have it.
	Invoice number nine, Mr. Wade, indicates that you performed hours of work that you were not compensated for because your cap had been reached?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And what did you do in those circumstances when the hours that you worked per month were more than the cap that was in your contract that you were permitted to be paid for?
	I was forced to lose that time.
	I didn't get paid for it.
	Okay.
	And that's what exhibit number nine shows?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	All right.
	And in Exhibit No.
	9, you've got a task, hours that were completed, and you just didn't bill for it.
	You noted the time, and then a zero beside it because you didn't bill the county for that time.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	All right.
	What about Invoice No.
	13?
	Can you flip to that for me?
	I have it.
	Is that a similar situation?
	Yes, ma 'am, it is.
	And what is it on Invoice No.
	13. This invoice makes me cry.
	There are so many hours here that I worked that I couldn't get paid for.
	And you worked those hours anyway, Mr. Wade?
	Oh, absolutely.
	This is not the type of job that you could walk away from just because you're not getting paid for it.
	I think there's some...
	Professional rules of responsibility to an attorney who's engaged in a case.
	You have to see it through.
	So it's not like I can just throw my hands up and say, well, I reached my monthly cap.
	I'm done.
	I can walk away.
	I can't do that.
	This is ongoing.
	It's constant.
	And I have to do the work.
	Can you look at invoice number 23 for me there in exhibit number 14?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Does that reflect a similar situation, the hours?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Invoice number 24 and 27, can you take a look at those and let us know if that reflects the same situation?
	Are you trying to depress me?
	It's the same, yes.
	Okay.
	And there's no workaround to that?
	You didn't attempt to work around that contractual cap on your hours?
	Oh, no, ma'am.
	All right.
	Bye.
	You were asked a lot of questions, Mr. Wade, about the affidavit that was submitted, correct?
	Do you recall those questions?
	I'm sorry.
	I'm stuck on this invoice.
	You know, if I was going to get a benefit, I'd like that benefit.
	That's the one I want.
	That didn't happen.
	That didn't happen.
	Okay.
	And there was no renegotiating your contract to reflect that those hours should be paid or anything?
	No, ma 'am.
	Okay.
	All right.
	Do you have your affidavit there in front of you?
	I do.
	The affidavit, of course, was attached to and provided in support of the state's response to Mr. Romney's motion, correct?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And you prepared that affidavit?
	I did.
	You signed that affidavit?
	I did.
	All of the allegations and the representations in that affidavit are true, is that right, Mr. Wade?
	Every one of them.
	Every one of them.
	You were asked a lot of questions about...
	Our line number 34. Can you turn to that for me, please?
	It's on page four of that affidavit.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Can you read it out loud for me, please?
	The district attorney and I are both financially independent professionals.
	Expenses for personal travel were roughly divided equally between us.
	At times, I have made and purchased travel for district attorney Willis and myself from my personal funds.
	At other times, District Attorney Willis has made and purchased travel for she and I from her personal funds.
	Examples of District Attorney Willis' purchasing plane tickets for she and I with her personal funds for our personal travel are attached.
	Funds, Mr. Wade.
	As you understand the term funds, does that include cash?
	Yes.
	Does that include credit?
	Yes.
	Does that include reimbursements?
	Yes.
	You didn't represent in your affidavit, Mr. Wade, that you were including all of the receipts from funds or travel expenses that were paid on your behalf by District Attorney Willis, correct?
	That's correct.
	You had, I think, your conversation with Ms. Merchant was you produced the receipt that you had.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Are you aware of any other receipts on the office?
	Or may I put you on there for a few steps?
	Here.
	That's all right, I'm going to write it on there.
	I'm going to mark this as statement number one.
	You testified, Mr. Waite, that District Attorney Willis purchased and funded the entire trip to Bailey's.
	That was her treat to you for her birthday?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And you testified that she purchased that plane ticket for you, correct?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And while you may not have had the receipts on hand when you filled out the affidavit because they weren't from your possession, are you aware now that there are receipts and that it reflects the district's attorney?
	Do you remember Mr. Wade approximately how much?
	Do you remember how much the flight was for you, your flight to Belize?
	And if you don't know, I'm not tendering it through you, I'm just asking you to take a look at that and see if that refreshes your resolution as to the amount that that plane ticket cost that was extended by district training.
	You may keep it.
	Does that refresh your recollection, Mr. Wade?
	It does, thank you.
	Approximately how much was the amount of the ticket that District Attorney Willis purchased for your travel today?
	$87.35.
	And I'm not tenuring it, Your Honor, but I will leave it with the court reporter for reference communication and reference.
	Thank you.
	All right.
	Mr. Wade.
	Your testimony here in court today, and consistent with your affidavit, was that the personal relationship, I think we called it dating today as well, Yes, 2022, March, I think was your testimony.
	Is that right?
	Yes, ma'am.
	And that March date isn't included in the affidavit.
	The affidavit is less specific, but that was your testimony today?
	Yes, ma'am.
	No.
	No.
	I'm sorry.
	I'm going to direct your attention to 2020.
	In 2020, were you dating the district attorney?
	No.
	2020, that was during the COVID pandemic, correct?
	It was.
	Was there a situation for you, Mr. Wade, that made you particularly vulnerable during the COVID period?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	In 2020, And a portion of 21, I was battling cancer.
	And that prevented me from pretty much leaving environments that aren't sterile.
	I had health on my mind.
	You were particularly cautious during that time?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Were you dating anyone in 2001?
	No mail.
	All right.
	Thank you, Mr. Wade.
	That's all I have.
	All right, Mr. Wade.
	The state asked you about how much money you're making now versus before, and you said you're making significantly less since you started working for Fulton County, correct?
	Well, I did say that, but what we're talking about is because now, at this point, the splitting of the financial obligations in the firm.
	are now there are two people carrying the weight of three.
	So that would scale back on the amount of income, right?
	Well, you're splitting the profits 50 /50, though, instead of one-third, correct?
	The profits, yes.
	Okay.
	So, but you did testify that you're making significantly less now.
	We heard about it for a few minutes.
	Significantly less now that you work for Fulton County, right?
	Would you agree with me that $236,000 is more than $184,000?
	Absolutely.
	Would you agree with me that $262,000 is more than $236,000?
	Absolutely.
	All of these years, despite you saying that you were a Three-way partner with Wade and Campbell and Bradley, and now a two-way partner with Campbell.
	All of your corporate tax returns are filed in the law firm of Nathan Wade, though, correct?
	My returns?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Yes, for your law firm.
	Well, for my law firm, because I also have personal returns.
	Right, and I'm not talking about your personal returns.
	I'm talking about your business returns.
	Yeah, but the question contemplates that my bring home money is more or less, so I want to be clear that...
	It's reflected in my personal returns.
	I didn't ask you anything about bring home money, though.
	I'm not sure what you're talking about.
	What I'm talking about is your question was the portion of my testimony dealing with earning significantly less money.
	No, no.
	My question is during, and let me, I'll just break it down.
	During 2019, you filed your business returns.
	I'm not talking about your personal.
	Your business returns for the law firm of Nathan Wade only, correct?
	I filed personal and business.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And even though you said you were partners with Bradley and Campbell, later on, you filed your business returns, not with them, but as a solo practitioner, correct?
	Ah, I see what you mean.
	There's a different return for that Wade Bradley Campbell entity.
	And I'm not asking about that.
	What I'm asking about is during the years 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022, You filed a business return for the law firm of Nathan Wade.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And in 2019, you said the law firm of Nathan Wade made $184,000, correct?
	I don't know.
	Does that sound familiar?
	Does that sound about like what you made in 2019 and reported on your taxes as a business law firm?
	If that's what's on the return, yes, ma 'am, you're right.
	And I'm happy I can bring those up.
	I've got one copy.
	I'm not planning on making tax returns.
	All right, may I approach that?
	Thank you.
	So in 2019, gross profit for the law firm of Nathan Wade is $184,000, correct?
	Let's see.
	The second line, number two, gross profit.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	$184,000, $824,000.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And then in 2020, you also filed Nathan Wade, attorney at law, and your birth profit was $230,000, correct?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And in 2021, you also filed as a solo Nathan Wade PC attorney at law, and your gross profit was $236,000, correct?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	And then in 2022, you filed as a solo practitioner Nathan Wade, and your gross income was $262,000, correct?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	But nowhere in these documents do you document that you received cash payments from this will, is correct?
	I hadn't looked through them.
	I would be surprised if there were something in there that said that.
	Do you want to look through them?
	Listen to the answer.
	I'd be shocked if there was something in there that said that I received some cash from Ms. Willis.
	Okay.
	But there is itemized expenditures for travel in here.
	You did itemize that.
	I didn't itemize anything like that.
	Your accountant itemized it.
	I hope so.
	But you're responsible for your taxes, even if your accountant files them, right?
	I agree.
	And so you itemized your expenses for travel on all these expenses, but you didn't put anything in there about you being reimbursed for half of that travel.
	Well, those are business returns.
	Yes, you used your business card to pay for the travel, right?
	But I wouldn't put a personal expense on a business return.
	But you used a business card to pay for...
	I use a business card to pay for everything.
	And what I do is turn over the statement to the accountant.
	And the accountant then says, okay, this expense, that's personal.
	We'll put that over here.
	This expense, that's business.
	We'll put that over here.
	And they reconcile it.
	So you wouldn't find a reimbursement from Ms. Willis on a business return.
	Okay, so they're not anywhere there.
	Nor would you find...
	Well, go ahead.
	No, I'm just asking.
	So there's nowhere for any of that cash to be reconciled there, right?
	On the business returns, no ma 'am.
	Okay.
	We talked a lot about the financial affidavits.
	I know the state asked you a couple questions about them.
	You filed one in 2022.
	In that one, you stated that you only had $5,000 in cash, correct?
	I believe you.
	That was sworn under oath.
	At the time of filing, yes ma 'am.
	Okay.
	And then in January of 2024, you filed another one that also swore that you only had $5,000 in cash, correct?
	At the time of the filing, yes ma 'am.
	Okay, so in 2022 and 2024, you only had $5,000 in cash.
	At that time, yes ma 'am.
	At that time, yes ma 'am.
	And then you also, all of those interrogatories, I'm not going to go through them in pain-sticking detail, but every single interrogatory you filed, there are four of them, all verified ones, every single one, you said you didn't have any cash stored in a safe, a safety deposit box or any other location, plaintiff rarely carries cash.
	If plaintiff does carry cash, it's a nominal amount, correct?
	That's correct.
	Okay, so we've got what?
	2021, you said you don't have cash.
	2023, you said you don't have cash.
	Again, in 2023, you said you don't have cash.
	And then in 2024, you don't have cash, right?
	So you're assuming that I received the cash and I stored it.
	I received the cash and I saved it.
	Well, you didn't put it in the bank, right?
	What's wrong with receiving the cash from this merchant and spending it?
	Nothing's wrong with it, but you didn't put it in the bank.
	That would contemplate.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	No, well, I said that if I were to store cash in my home, then why would I share that with the world, is what I said.
	I didn't say that I had some cash stored up in some place, because that's not true.
	And you've talked a lot about this, I split with a third, I split with half.
	From, let's see, from the check you received from Fulton County July 15, 2022, so back all the way back for July 2022, not a single check you've received from Fulton County has gone into a joint banking account.
	Every single check has gone into your own personal banking account, correct?
	All of them, with the exception of the checks that were going into the WBC firm, went into...
	My business bank account, which is solely in my name.
	Right.
	Your business, your WBC account that you're talking about, that account was closed, though, in June of 2022.
	Correct.
	So everything after June of 2022 was put in a Nathan Wade bank account, not a corporate bank account.
	I think the question right before that only needed a yes or no.
	So, no ma 'am, the checks were deposited into Firm accounts.
	Law firm accounts.
	Law firm of Nathan Wade, PC?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	As a solo practitioner?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Okay, so they were not deposited into accounts with Campbell or Bradley?
	No, ma 'am.
	They were not.
	However, there were checks written to Campbell and Bradley that will reflect the third, the third, the third.
	And we've tried to get those bank records, but you've objected to those, correct?
	You've tried to get what bank records?
	We subpoenaed bank records, and you've objected to all of those.
	Right?
	Your Honor, I'm going to object to the relevance.
	It's relevant if he's saying he has all these records, but yet we've tried to get them, and he's trying to keep them from us, but he doesn't bring all of the records.
	You can make an inference if he's...
	There's law that says you can make an inference if some documents are within the party's control and they won't provide them, that there's an inference that they're not positive.
	There was no obligation for Mr. Wade to produce evidence that Ms. Merchant couldn't find an admissible way to produce.
	I believe it's irrelevant.
	We've covered the ground, and I object to any further question.
	I'll sustain that.
	Ms. Merchant, let's find some new ground here.
	Are you willing to waive your privilege with Mr. Bradley so that he can testify?
	I am not willing to waive attorney kind privilege.
	Okay, thank you.
	Only on the health questions that were asked on the phone.
	And I can ask you from here.
	I don't want to get into the type of cancer.
	I want to get into the medical condition itself.
	Did I understand you to say that you had cancer in the year of 2020?
	Yes, sir.
	And you explained that because of that, in 2020, you kept yourself in a sterile environment?
	That's right, yes, sir.
	Now, what about 2021?
	2021, just focusing on my health, trying to get back to myself.
	Do you remember I asked you some questions about Capeville?
	Yes, sir.
	And the condo?
	Yes, sir.
	And you indicated that prior to November 1st of 2021, you had spent time at the condo, the Capeville condo?
	Yes, sir.
	With Ms. Willis, right?
	Yes, sir.
	And with someone else?
	You said Ms. Yerty?
	Ms. Yerty, yes, sir.
	Okay, so you were not concerned that it's not a sterile environment, was it?
	Are you inferring that Ms. Yerty and the illness is not sterile?
	Of course it's a sterile environment.
	It's a conduct.
	But don't you remember that I followed up and said, where else might you have been to show your cell phone records from Haightville when you said the airport?
	Right?
	Not a sterile environment, though.
	The airport, do you agree?
	It is not.
	Okay, what about restaurants?
	Not a sterile environment, right?
	They are not.
	And the Porsche, you said something about a Porsche what?
	The Porsche experience.
	That doesn't sound very sterile to me.
	Is that a sterile environment?
	You're inside your vehicle.
	Yeah, but don't you mingle with others?
	You can.
	Yeah, and you were doing all that in 2021 before November 1st.
	That's what you testified to, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	So there's no reason why you couldn't be dating in 2021, is there?
	Do you mean 2020, Mr. Saydown?
	No, say 2021.
	All right.
	Correct?
	Dating?
	No.
	No reason.
	No reason.
	Got it.
	Thanks.
	All right.
	Mr. Gillen?
	Okay.
	Mr. Stocks?
	Just real briefly, you said you started dating in early 2022, and you also used the term personal relationship, and there was no dating, no personal relationship prior to early 2022.
	Is that correct?
	I want to make sure I answer you.
	So, let's be clear.
	2022 was the start of any intimate sexual relationship with a district attorney.
	Okay, and that's what I was wanting to be clear.
	In your affidavit, you used the term personal relationship.
	Got it.
	Today you've used the term dating.
	And your testimony today is that that includes the term basically physical or sexual or intimate relationship.
	Is that correct?
	Yes, sir.
	.
	That's all I've got to do.
	All right, I'm not seeing anyone else.
	Ms. Cross, any regrets?
	All right, Ms. Murchin, can you please be excused?
	All right.
	All right, you may step down, Mr. Wade, and please don't discuss your testimony with any other witnesses.
	She mentioned subpoena, Judge.
	Let me just say this.
	That was an inference made that I was somehow evading service of a subpoena.
	We can take that up.
	I don't think we need to have that on the record in this year.
	Understood, Don.
	Thank you.
	All right, Ms. Merchant, any other witnesses?
	Laura, Ms. Cross.
	Your Honor, I am going to adopt and remove to the motion to quash the district attorney.
	There's been now lots of testimony from Mr. Wade.
	I don't believe that there could be a showing for the need for the district attorney to testify as well.
	for all of the reasons that were cited in the state's motion to quash initially, tremendously high burden to call opposing counsel.
	I don't believe it's been that particularly given the cumulative nature that would be the subject of personal details that just the way it's not testified.
	All right, Ms. Virgin, what do you think you can establish and have through the testimony of Ms. Willis?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		This is massive.
unidentified		And let me put, let me stop there.
		Conflict on the evidence judge.
		Now that Mr. Wade has testified, there's a conflict in multiple different issues.
		Obviously, it's all the different issues.
		The first one is the reimbursement issue, cash.
		That opens the door in and of itself, as well as testifying.
		What's the conflict there?
		He testified that he didn't have receipts, but we don't know if Ms. Willis has receipts.
		So that's one issue.
		So we don't know.
		So there's no conflict.
		We just don't know.
		We don't know.
		So it's a question, not a conflict.
		But what else?
		That is a question.
		And there's a lot of different issues with different reasons.
		The first one would be the receipts.
		Whether or not these cash payments, the release trips, whether or not she paid for the entire thing in cash.
		A lot of things he couldn't remember.
		So now it goes to Miss Willis, unfortunately.
		He testified that she insists on paying her away, gave him some cash.
		That's the quote, some cash.
		Miami trip, she booked it but thought it would balance out.
		A couple other trips that we didn't get any information about.
		Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, all of those could be financial benefits.
		We don't know.
		He didn't know.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Fannie Willis testified!
unidentified		Murie, her best friend, testified that it happened in 2019.
		And now Mr. Wade has testified that the relationship began to become romantic in 2022.
		So that is a conflict in and of itself.
		Right there, that's a big conflict.
		We've also got more receipts.
		But the biggest thing about the conflict is when the relationship started.
		He said he talked with Willis in the conference room after we filed our motion.
		He specifically didn't use cash, the term cash, in the affidavit, but he told anybody who would ask about the cash.
		And he specifically discussed this group and the response.
		All right, so you've highlighted the areas you'd like to go into.
		I think the central question may be, what is it other than, I'm just really curious what she has to say.
		You have...
		To put on the record.
		So that's what I'd like to go through.
		Ms. Gross?
		I think you've identified.
		Ms. Merchant hasn't advised inconsistencies.
		She's identified areas of inquiry.
		The testimony in the record from Mr. Wade is not inconsistent.
		and it's unrebutted.
		And so I don't believe, given the testimony of Mr. Wade and the extent of the questioning of him, that there is any reason at this point to go into the district attorney herself.
		Again, I know the court's read all the pleadings.
		It really is such a compelling need, is the language of the case law, a compelling need to call opposing counsel, given the record that's now before the court.
		I don't believe it's on that.
		Your Honor, very briefly.
		Ms. Willis needs to testify.
		Her best friend or good friend has directly contradicted the declaration that was made by Mr. Wade attached to the governor's response.
		And it wasn't just the declaration of Mr. Wade.
		It was filed by the district attorney by and through her assistance here.
		She owns that.
		And so that affidavit is owned by her, and there are deep concerns that that affidavit is false.
		And that Ms. Willis knew it was false.
		And that she needs to come in here, and she wants to tell us about the cash.
		First time we've heard about the cash, oh yeah, we got cash.
		I don't have any deposit slips, don't have any record of it.
		Maybe Ms. Willis can say, here, all my records where I paid $10,000 in cash.
		We need to know that.
		Also, Ms. Wallace's financial disclosure.
		Let's not forget that.
		We're talking about two people who went to extraordinary lengths to hide their relationship, to hide the nature of their relationship.
		Extraordinary.
		The district attorney needs to take the stand.
		And she needs to tell this court and this courtroom why she filed financial disclosures identifying prohibitive sources, which Mr. Wade clearly is a prohibitive source.
		Did you get gifts and benefits?
		Now, we've seen all this.
		We've seen the trips.
		We've seen all of the things that total up to...
		Around $10,000 in cash.
		Yet, on the financial declaration for 2021, which was filed in April 2022, and the financial declaration for 2022, which was filed in April 2023, there is no listing of any gifts whatsoever over $100 from a prohibited source.
		It cries out for her testimony.
		She needs to be able to get up there and say, why didn't you tell on the disclosure form so that people will know the nature of the relationship between prohibitive sources and the public official, in this case the district attorney, who happens to then make a decision to hire someone who ends up being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars or his firm and him, and none of that is revealed.
		And the answer is, oh, it's unrebutted.
		He's explained it's all in cash.
		Let her get up.
		And obviously, we are advocates in our position.
		But that explanation of cash does not pass, the smell test, or the straight-faced test.
		She needs to go on the record.
		She filed this motion with his declaration.
		We've seen what happened here.
		Just two or three more sentences.
		We need to have the full picture as we've done Mr. Wade of his false interrogatory.
		Oh, there she is!
		It's Big Fanny!
		We need to go over all of this and explain exactly what happened.
	We asked the court...
	It's Big Fanny!
	...that the court allowed Ms. Willis to be called interrogated on all these matters.
	Can I wait to, Your Honor?
	Just a moment, Ms. Willis.
	So, Ms. Cross, I don't know if you want to speak with Ms. Willis now.
	It's sounding like maybe they're withdrawing the objection to the motion.
	Or does Ms. Willis want to take the lead here?
	Okay.
	So, the...
	The position of the district attorney at this point is that she's no longer contesting the subpoena.
	Ms. Merchant has called her as the next witness.
	Wow!
	I would ask...
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Big fanny!
unidentified		I need three documents in front of me and there are three filings of Ms. Merchant.
		Does anyone have the three filings of this merchant?
		Does the court have the three filings of this merchant?
		When you say the filings, you mean like the pleadings?
		The pleadings, yes, Your Honor.
		Okay.
		I think we can locate those for you.
		I want the one filed on 28th, the one filed immediately after we filed ours, and the final one.
		If you want to take a break to get them, I can make a copy.
		I think we have one.
		You know, the only copy I have is going to have my notes on it, so if we don't have a clean copy...
		Oh.
		All right.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Fanny looks rough!
		Big.
		Fanny.
		I cannot believe it.
		I cannot believe what is happening.
		Okay, here we go.
		Royce, big.
		Okay, there is no way.
		There is no way that this is happening right now.
unidentified		Someone who's actually making the copy.
		You got it?
		Okay.
		Let's cross.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Ladies and gentlemen, this is unprecedented.
		This is wild.
		Fannie Willis is going to testify.
		Everyone, everyone has said that Fannie Willis wouldn't testify today.
		Let's go.
		Let's go.
unidentified		Bye.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Ladies and gentlemen, everyone said that Fannie Willis, you can see here the live shot of the courthouse.
		We have been live for four hours covering this.
		I've been watching it with you.
		I did take a second to eat lunch.
		Nobody wants to see me eat a salad.
		And I cannot believe my eyes.
		I just screamed.
		We just screamed in the studio.
		When Big Fanny came frump-a-lumpin' right up to the pedestal like she was Jenny from the block ready to throw it all down.
		Wow!
		Put up the meme.
		Let's put up the meme.
		That's a great meme.
		That's a perfect meme.
		I cannot believe what we've just seen.
		Okay, so apparently there's going to be a five-minute break for some documents to be made.
		Yeah, super shaky voice, our producers are telling me.
		So ladies and gentlemen, Danny D. Urbina, producer Danny, is telling me that Fanny Willis' entire body language was terrified and shaky and was clearly upset.
		So let me handicap this.
		Because I've been taking calls, and I've been calling my friends who are prosecutors, and they're saying, it's over.
		It's finished.
		And if Fannie Willis is proving now, by going up there, by shaking like a leaf, and by having her voice crack, and by looking up, looking like, hell, she looked like she got hit by a cement truck.
		Fannie Willis knows she's going down in flames.
		She isn't doing this in a position of strength to go bull rush the court.
		Did you see her come tearing out straight up towards the judge like she owned the place?
		First off, never approach a judge like that.
		Second off, this is a position of weakness, not a position of strength.
		So we are going to witness Fannie Willis.
		We're staying with it.
		We're staying with it.
		We're going to witness Fannie Willis.
		Answer the questions.
		Ladies and gentlemen, here are some of the headlines from around the country.
		Let's start with Fannie Willis' closest friend who just nuked her testimony.
		Ladies and gentlemen, Fulton County District Attorney Fannie Willis started her romantic relationship with her prosecutor lover, hot dog man, three years before they stated, according to her college friend, in dramatic testimony, Fannie Willis' closest college friend came forward in the court.
		And said, no, they are lying to you.
		Fannie Willis is going to have to answer that question, ladies and gentlemen.
		Robin Yerty's testimony directly contradicts the information provided by Fannie Willis and Wade.
		The relationship did not begin until after Wade was hired in November.
unidentified		Wow.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Yerty, this is her friend.
		You can see her pictured here in the article.
		Yerty said the court...
		That there's no doubt that Willis and Wade were in a romantic relationship before the hiring and confirmed that she was certain about it.
		This is a blockbuster testimony directly from inside of the house of Big Fanny.
		Things are not going well, okay?
		The Daily Mail has at the top of their page that the top of their...
		Which is the most visited news website on the planet.
		Fannie Willis' lover boy, Nathan Wade, sweats out bullets.
		And Trump prosecutor is grilled in court about a fare as he reveals she paid him back for their lavish trips together in cash.
		But the payments couldn't be tracked, you see, because they're in cash and nobody knows where it is.
		Maybe this is my fanny pack.
		I kid you not, that's part of the questioning.
		I look forward to covering...
		We're going to put all the clips together.
		Executive producer ALX is getting a comprehensive series of clips.
		We thought they might end.
		We thought they weren't going to bring Big Fanny up.
		But Big Fanny is going to sit on the stand, ladies and gentlemen.
		And she is going to take it.
		I cannot believe it.
		It looks like they're coming back.
		We have a bunch of clips to play for you.
		We have so much information, so much news.
		MSNBC is saying that all of this is going down in flames.
		That they're doomed.
		Ladies and gentlemen, can we get to one clip?
		Yeah, please.
		Check this out.
		MSNBC is depressed about the body language of the court saying that Fannie has lost.
		MSNBC is straight up telling their viewers this is over.
		They're finished.
		Watch.
unidentified		Do you think we should reach a point?
		We're for the interest of protecting the trial, the entire Fulton County trial, that they should voluntarily step aside.
		It's a great question.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to get that clip without the music.
		That's something that has been – that's something that either ALX – the executive producer ALX can tell me or not is good.
		But we've got to be careful when we're playing clips with a bunch of music on them because, well, there's rules about that kind of stuff.
		Okay.
		Ladies and gentlemen, here we go.
		Donald Trump has posted.
		Donald Trump has posted about this.
		Okay, we got this one, Royce?
		Yep.
		Donald Trump posted.
		Yep, he's lying with a clip of Kevin O 'Leary, Mr. Wonderful.
		This is Donald Trump's first commentary on the train wreck disaster disqualification hearing.
		Ladies and gentlemen, here we go.
		This is what the president posted.
unidentified		He's lying.
		That's what I think.
		And they'll call him out on it.
		It just feels that way.
		It sounds that way.
		He had a relationship with her long before he said he did.
		That's just the way it is.
		And I'm really surprised that the lawyers have said, did you ever have sexual relationships with this woman before this date?
		Is he going to lie on that stand?
		Is that coming in the next round of questions?
		Because at some point that's coming.
		He'll either purge himself, purge himself, or...
		He'll admit the truth, and he is in trouble either way.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Wow!
		That is Donald Trump's first commentary on the case.
		Donald Trump, as we played for you, told Trump's full comments from New York.
		Donald Trump gave a five-minute press conference this morning.
		We played it earlier in the show, but this, in Georgia, has been a non-stop cluster F. Wow!
		So many things going wrong here.
		Ladies and gentlemen, so many things.
		First off, the sexual intercourse question.
		Nathan Wade was asked, have you had sexual intercourse with the Big Fanny?
		And here was his answer.
		Tell me, does it sound like he's being truthful here?
unidentified		Let me rephrase, if I might.
unidentified		The way it has been characterized in, for example, the response of the state, and I believe in your affidavit, is there's a difference between a personal relationship and a professional relationship.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Correct?
unidentified		Yes, sir.
		Okay.
		I'm not talking about a professional relationship.
		I'm talking about a personal relationship.
		Have you had a personal relationship at all, and you know what I mean by that, after the summer of 2023?
		Are you asking me if I had intercourse with the district attorney?
		I was trying not to, but I guess if you're going to characterize it as that, the answer would be no.
		It's been purely professional since the summer of 2023.
		So that's where we're having issues.
		You'll have to explain because I don't know what the issue would be.
		No, I will explain to you.
		Thank you.
		You say personal.
		We're very good friends.
		Probably closer than ever because of these attacks.
		But if you're asking me about specific...
		Intercourse, the answer is no.
		How about if I change it from intercourse to romantic?
		No.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Well, the problem with Nathan's hot dog is that he spent a little too much time in the weenie mobile.
		Because Fanny's best friend has come through to say, no, that's not the case.
		In fact, there was a hot dog roller competition with Nathan's hot dog at Fanny's house, billing 24 hours overnight.
		Check this out.
		Unbelievable.
		Did Nathan Wade lie under oath?
		This is what's causing pure apoplectic panic and seizures throughout the corporate media.
		Watch this clip, ladies and gentlemen.
		Here's your proof.
unidentified		When did your romantic relationship with Ms. Willis begin?
		2022.
		When?
		In 2022.
		Early 2022.
		So you were appointed in November of 2021?
		Yes, ma 'am.
		And your relationship started early.
		What's early?
		January?
		February?
		Around March.
		Around March.
		But you two met at an October 2019 judicial conference, correct?
		Yes, ma 'am.
		That testimony directly contradicts earlier testimony from one of Willis' former good friends who said the relationship began well before Wade testified it did and predated his hearing by the DA.
		You have no doubt that their romantic relationship was in effect from 2019 until the last time you spoke with her.
		No doubt.
		Did you observe them do things that are common among people having a romantic relationship?
		Yes.
		Such as?
		Can you give us an example?
		Hugging, kissing, with affection.
		All before November 1st of 2021, correct?
		Yes.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		So Nathan Wade is saying that he didn't have a romantic relationship, and that that relationship started in 2022, and yet here we are, ladies and gentlemen, with Fannie Willis' best friend and roommate.
		They were hugging.
		They were kissing.
		They were playing grab the big fanny together all the way back to 2019.
		I mean, breathtaking.
		Also, Nathan Wade saying that he and his wife just didn't like each other, and that gives him a hall pass to go cheat on his wife.
		Really a despicable and utterly grotesque thing to say.
		Ladies and gentlemen, big fanny is coming back out.
		Holy smokes.
		Game over.
		Big Fanny is back out.
		This is live.
		This is live.
		Will Big Fanny get spanked?
unidentified		I have a tissue in here.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Is Big Fanny prepared?
unidentified		Alright, we are back on the record.
		Deputy Scott, if you could swear on our next witness.
		Here we go.
		Here we go.
		Look at her.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		What a snake.
		Here we go.
		The big fanny's in the seat.
unidentified		District Attorney Fani, F-A-N-I.
		Last name is Willis.
		Ms. Willis, how did you know to come into the courtroom right now?
		There were people I was pacing in my office, and I heard someone yell, his testimony was done.
		It only made sense to me that I would be your next witness, and I've been very anxious to have this conversation with you today.
		So I ran to the courtroom.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Oh my God.
unidentified		You heard that Mr. Wade was done testifying.
		That's when you just assumed you would be the next witness.
		It only makes sense.
		Did you listen to any of the test?
		I mean, in my office case, ma'am.
		Did you listen to any of the arguments?
		Oh, my God.
		Right.
		I listened to the argument this morning where Adam Abadi, I thought, did an excellent job pointing out how dishonest you were with the court on Monday.
		And I'm actually surprised that the hearing continued.
		But since it did, here I am.
		Great.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Oh, what a bee!
unidentified		First, let's just talk about what you did in preparation for today.
		Did you meet with Mr. Wade at all?
		Once the motion was filed, did you meet with Mr. Wade and talk to him about...
		The motion that I filed to disqualify you.
		On January, this first January motion?
		Yes.
		I don't know if you could say talked about.
		I probably had some choice words about some of the things that you said that were dishonest within this motion.
		So I don't know that it was a conversation.
		As you know, Mr. Wade is a southern gentleman.
		Me, not so much.
		Okay, but my question was, did you have a conversation?
		I didn't have a substantive conversation.
		You did not?
		I read this motion.
		Skimmed it more so.
		And I've probably said some choice things to him about some of the lies they were told.
		Okay.
		Because, you know, we used to be in a day and time where you had 60 minutes and people did stories and they verified information and you had this great reporting.
		But it seems today that a lawyer writes a lie and then it's printed for all of the world to see.
		Well, I just want to make sure that you answer the question I asked.
		So, my question was...
		I told you what happened.
		I read the motion.
		I am sure I told you what my opinion of it is.
		And past that, we had no substantive conversation.
		You did not.
		Is there something you didn't understand?
		No, I just wanted to make sure that you did not have a meeting with him in the conference room to discuss the motion.
		In the conference room of my office, within this week, you produced some financial document.
		That financial document was given to me, something, and I'm not even sure who was given it to him by me, or Mr. Abadi gave it to me.
		And I think he showed me a document in our conference room.
		But as far as a substantive conversation, I would not have, I don't believe I've had any conversation with him that is.
		Substantive related to this.
		Okay.
		I have had conversations with him since you filed the motion, but they wouldn't be substantive to this.
		He sent me very nice sermons that have been done.
		And so we've had conversations about, did you listen to that sermon?
		You know, things of that nature.
		And I would say they were in relationship to this because I think he did it to be kind.
		Okay.
		Let's start back in 2019.
		So you and Mr. Wade met in October 2019 at a conference?
		That is correct.
		I think in one of your motions, you tried to implicate and slept with him at that conference, which I find to be extremely offensive.
		I stayed at that conference.
		Mr. Wade was my teacher.
		I did not meet him when he taught the class.
		I was standing outside talking to Lisa Reeves, who was a judge.
		Me and her were just...
		Having a conversation.
		Mr. Wade walks up and they hug each other.
		They have some brief conversation.
		She introduces us.
		Mr. Honor, I'm going to object.
		We kind of thought that when you ask a question, you can't answer the question.
		Not a speech, so I object to the speech.
		I agree.
		You're not able to explain my answers.
		I believe she's able to explain her answers.
		Ms. Murchin, that's okay.
		I can handle it.
		Ms. Willis, I'll ask you to just listen to the answer, or excuse me, the question.
		And keep the answers confined to the questions as best you can.
	I think you'll have more than enough ample opportunity on when the state...
	Well, it's highly offensive when someone lies on you, and it's highly offensive when they try to implicate that you slept with somebody the first day you met with them, and I take exception to it.
	All right.
	Well, Ms. Willis, you'll have the opportunity to explain all that when it's the state's turn to ask more open-ended questions.
	Ms. Merchant.
	Thank you, Judge.
	So again, my question was, you all met at that conference, right?
	We did.
	As I stated, he taught the class.
	I did not actually meet him when he taught the class.
	I walked out of the class, and I'm not sure if it was that exact class or we went to lunch, but we were standing in the vestibule, like, outside of the class.
	Me and Judge Reeves were having a conversation.
	She had worked at a law firm I worked at.
	Back in 1996.
	We're getting way afar.
	I mean, I don't mind her explaining her answers, but I literally just asked if they met at that conference.
	She's explaining how she met Mr. Wade, which was exactly the question asked by Ms. Merchant.
	These answers are more than appropriate.
	Ms. Merchant, if you want more concise answers, perhaps you could lead the witness.
	I will.
	Thank you, Judge.
	Isn't it true that you met Mr. Wade in October 2019 at the judges' conference?
	We haven't gotten to the point where Ms. Willis should be treated.
	I very much want to be here, so I'm not a hostile witness.
	I very much want to be here.
	Not so much that you're hostile, Ms. Wills, it'd be an adverse witness.
	Your interests are opposed to Ms. Murchin's.
	Thank you.
	Ms. Murchin's interests are contrary to democracy, Your Honor, not to mine.
	All right, let's proceed.
	We can keep things moving.
	Ms. Murphy, next question, please.
	Okay, so we've confirmed when you met.
	After that, isn't it true?
	No, I need to explain this, and I think I get to explain my answers.
	When I met him, Judge Reeves introduced us.
	He handed me his business card.
	I'm unsure if I handed him my business card, but we exchanged information.
	He said, if you ever need any help, give me a call.
	And he walked to the parking lot.
	So after that, You started dating shortly thereafter, correct?
	That's a lie.
	That's one of your lies.
	I know her as Robin Bryant.
	I knew her.
	So, Robin did not go to my college.
	She went to the college of...
	I went to Howard University.
	She went to Morgan State.
	I met her through some people I knew.
	In college, we hung out.
	A bit.
	Not much because she was in Baltimore and I was in Washington, D.C. But we hung out a bit.
	After college, I lost contact with her.
	I probably didn't see Robin again until maybe seven or eight years ago, a chance meeting here in Atlanta.
	But we did not have a consistent relationship from when I left college and came to Emory Law School here in Atlanta.
	But eight to ten years ago, just by happenstance, I ran into her.
	She was in Atlanta.
	Been friends with Robin for 30-something years.
	Did you hear my answer, ma 'am?
	Yes, and I'm asking if you've been friends with her for 30-something years.
	I've known her for 30-something years.
	We certainly hung out and partied together in college.
	She was from the D.C. area.
	She would come home and party together.
	Wasn't close, but she was certainly in the girlfriends that partied together.
	And then, like I said, I ran into her about 10 years ago in Atlanta, Georgia.
	But we didn't talk.
	Throughout that time period, I didn't see her.
	I didn't even know where she was.
	When I ran into her, I was surprised she was in Atlanta.
	And so, yes, I have known her probably since 1990, 1991, but we have not maintained a consistent relationship that whole time.
	For the last 10 years or five, whatever you'd like to classify it as, have you been friends with her?
	I have not spoken to Robin in over a year.
	I certainly do not consider her a friend now.
	I think that she, you know, there's a saying, no good deed goes unpunished.
	And I think that she betrayed our friendship.
	So let's narrow it down the timeline now.
	So my questions are going to be from 2019 until she no longer was employed for you, the last time you all talked.
	So all of my next questions are just focused on that time frame, okay?
	Yes, ma 'am.
	Up until she left your office.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	During 2019, you all were friends, correct?
	Yes, we knew each other in 2019.
	During 2020, you all were friends, correct?
	Yes, we were friends during that time period.
	During 2021, you all were friends, correct?
	Yes.
	And such good friends that when you needed a place to stay, you asked her if you could take over her lease.
	That's a lie.
	You did not move into her apartment?
	I did, but that's not the way you characterize it as wrong.
	I asked if you asked if you could take over her lease.
	I did not ask if I could take over her lease.
	Did you move into her apartment?
	I moved into her condo in April of '21.
	The circumstances around that were that Robin met her husband.
	They wanted to move into another and separate place.
	She wanted to get rid of her condo.
	My father was living with me at the house.
	Because of this case and because of my stance on gangs, my life was being threatened regularly.
	My father urged me to leave our home at the same time as luck would have it.
	Robin wanted to give up her lease because she wanted to move in with this new man she met, who eventually became her husband.
	And so, as life circumstances worked, my dad was begging me to leave the house.
	He was afraid for me, afraid for his grandchildren.
	She wanted someone to take over her lease so that she didn't, you know, have to pay a fee or get abandoned.
	And so, I don't remember when, but probably March or April of '21, I move in and take over her lease.
	And did you pay her or did you pay the leasing agent?
	No, I don't even know who the leasing agent was.
	I paid her.
	You paid her.
	Did you pay her cash or did you just pay her?
	There were some times that I would give her cash, but mostly I paid her via cash app.
	That would be the most convenient thing.
	So I would not only give her her rent, but then when the utilities would come in, whatever the utility was, she might be like, I need 70 bucks, I need $100, whatever it was.
	And we never had a problem with money.
	Whatever she told me it was, I never asked to see a bill.
	I never questioned her.
	I just gave it to her.
	What percentage would you say you paid cash versus cash app?
	Oh, the vast majority was cash out.
	I don't know what percentage.
	I'm not going to guess that.
	But the vast majority was cash out.
	But there would be times she would say, you know, this bill came in at $70.
	Here goes $70.
	Did you have a monthly rent amount that you paid her?
	I can't remember.
	It was $1,400, $1,500.
	I can't remember what it was.
	And it would vary, which I don't understand to this day.
	But like I said, I never questioned her.
	Whenever she said it was, that's what I paid.
	When did you move out?
	I abruptly moved out in February, either late January or early February of '22.
	February 2022, is that what you said?
	January, February of '22.
	I believe it is January, but I paid her half the rent of February of '22, is what I remember.
	Because I was offering to pay the whole rent, even though I didn't live there.
	I didn't think it was right.
	I ended up just paying her half the rent.
	So that's after you moved out.
	You said you paid her half.
	Okay.
	And the time that you said you had to move out of your house because you were scared, did your dad stay there at your house?
	My father was concerned.
	Yes, we were both concerned.
	But he remained there.
	My father was 80 years old.
	He would have been 79. He was scared to death of COVID.
	You have to go back to when this was.
	My father's an older man.
	I wanted him to move out.
	We had some...
	Discussions about him moving out and what he decided was the risk of COVID was more dangerous than the risk of the people that were threatening.
	Typical man, more worried about his daughter and his grandchildren than his own safety.
	You'll get to meet him and you'll understand he doesn't scare too easily.
	So your grandkids or his grandkids were living at the house as well at that time?
	I don't know how old your children are, but when you have adult children, they leave and they come back.
	They leave and they come back.
	So there have been periods of time that they're there, they come, they do whatever they want to do.
	Children do what children do.
	As long as their mother has a house, they'll come to it.
	Unfortunately, now the threats because of this case have gotten so extreme, I just pay a mortgage and no one lives there.
	And that's what I was going to ask you.
	So when you moved out in, I think you said April 2021, you left your dad and your two kids at the house?
	My dad and my two kids were not at the house.
	They were not.
	Okay, so they didn't still live at your house?
	My youngest daughter certainly did not live there.
	My oldest daughter would come back and forth.
	I can't say month for month when she was there or when she was not there.
	I know that she has been there post me moving out.
	At this time, no one is at my house.
	So, at some point after you moved out for the safety reasons, at least one of your children did come back to the house.
	Ms. Merchant, can we get to either the relationship or the financial benefit?
	Yes.
	So, let's see.
	We were back at 2021.
	So, you were still friends with Ms. Earty then.
	Were you also friends with Mr. Bradley?
	I've never been friends with Mr. Bradley.
	You've never been friends with Mr. Bradley?
	No, I don't consider us to be friends.
	Just like Mr. Bradley, but I don't consider us to be friends.
	Is he someone that you would have in your phone and you would message with?
	I might have text messaged him.
	Would you text message him and Mr. Wade on the same conversations?
	I don't recall doing that, but if it happened, it wouldn't surprise me.
	Okay, so that wouldn't surprise you, the three of you.
	How frequently would you think that the three of you would have texted?
	I wouldn't think very often, but...
	You're asking me to recall.
	I don't even know what time period you're asking me to recall, but I'm not going to speak to that because I just really don't know the answer to that.
	So I don't want to speculate as to how often that would happen.
	But it's not out of my practice to text two people on one text message.
	So if you told me that happened and showed it to me, it wouldn't surprise me, although I have no recollection of it.
	But there would be some record of it in your phone.
	Or the phone records would have some record of those texts.
	Talk about, you know, you said that sometimes you paid Mr. Yerdy cash.
	When you went on vacation with Mr. Wade, let's just go one by one.
	Let's start with the first one.
	What's the first time you went on vacation with Mr. Wade?
	I think the first time we went on vacation was around...
	April of 22, and it's a vacation.
	It's a stretch, but I'm trying to be comprehensive.
	I recall April of 22. His birthday is March the 18th, so that would have been his 49th birthday.
	I took him to like Tennessee for the day.
	I think we went to a museum.
	I think we might have stayed the night.
	I'm not sure, but I mean...
	Tennessee's kind of hard to call a vacation, but I just am trying to be inclusive.
	And like I said, I don't think, I know it wasn't more than a day.
	So you're going to spend the night?
	I think that we did.
	That's what I'm telling you.
	I think that there's a possibility that we stayed that night in April of 22. Who paid for the hotel?
	I think I did.
	It was his birthday.
	And would you have used a credit card?
	probably maybe a dead.
	Are.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Hold on, we're pulling back up.
unidentified		I don't know, like, you know, it's not like when you're in grade school and you send a little letter and it says, will you be my girlfriend and you check it.
		I don't know the day that we started seeing each other, but it was early 22 is my recollection.
		Okay, early 22. And you all went to Florida on vacation as well?
		I don't recall going to Florida on vacation with him.
		You never went to Florida with Mr. Wade?
		We went to, when we went to get on the cruise ship, we went to Miami.
		Okay, that's the only time that you went to Florida with him?
		I think we went to Miami and spent the night.
		That's my recollection.
		I think we spent one night so that we wouldn't miss the ship.
		That's my recollection.
		You paid for that hotel?
		In Miami?
		I don't remember that.
		And how'd you get to Miami?
		We would have flown.
		And we've done that so that I'm clear.
		We've done that twice.
		I think one time we stayed.
		And I honestly can't tell you, did we stay when the ship left or did we stay when the ship came back?
		I also can't tell you.
		So there's two cruises out of Miami.
		There's one that's in that October time period that was with his mom.
		And then there was another that was a New Year's Eve trip.
		I know I paid for the New Year's Eve trip because the tickets were $6.97 each.
		And I thought, this is ridiculous that the tickets are $700 to go to Miami.
		But when you travel during New Year's Eve, You know, they get you.
		So let's back up and talk about the first time that you went to Florida with Mr. Wade.
		That was the time that you said you stayed in Miami at the hotel the first night?
		That's the time I told you.
		I am not sure.
		So I'm not sure of two things.
		So I want to make sure that my testimony is clear.
		I'm not sure if we stayed in Miami on the October trip.
		I'm not sure if we stayed in Miami on the December trip.
		I just can't remember that.
		And I also don't remember, so that the record is clear, I don't remember if the necessity was as we got on the ship or we got off the ship.
		But I do remember there was a nightspin in Miami because either whatever.
		I don't remember.
		But I think that there was a nightspin in Miami.
		That cruise is the one that you took in October, right?
		Ma 'am, if you have something to refresh my recollection, I'm intentionally trying to not be difficult with you, but I don't want to make up something.
		I know that on one of those two trips, you stayed in Miami.
		I am not sure right now.
		You're asking me about...
		Oh, I think...
		I'm sorry.
		You misunderstood.
		I wasn't asking you which...
		I was not asking you which night you stayed in Miami.
		I'm asking if you took a cruise in October 2022 with Mr. Wake.
		Yes, and his mom.
		And his mother.
		That's what I was asking.
		Yes.
		Is that the first time you met his mother?
		Yes.
		It was on that cruise.
		And that was Royal Caribbean, I believe?
		I honestly don't remember what ship.
		I've taken two cruises.
		I don't know what the ships were.
		But he paid for the flight and the cruise on Royal Caribbean that time.
		So yes, he paid.
	He is the original one that does it.
	He has something called...
	Mr. Wade is a world traveler.
	I'm not as versed as him.
	He's been to six of the seven continents.
	And so he has both a personal travel agent.
	And he also has a cruise travel agent.
	I don't know anything about either of those kind of travel agents.
	He's the one that would book the travel.
	But we need to be clear when we're talking about just because he booked it doesn't mean...
	Like, I don't consider him having taken me anyplace.
	Let me just be honest.
	The only one that's ever taken somebody someplace is for his 50th birthday.
	I consider that I took him to Belize.
	And I took him to Belize because...
	You know, I don't want to discuss his personal business, but I'm happy Mr. Wade is still here with us.
	And I did 50 big.
	Very big.
	Very big.
	Even though she had a travel agent.
	I'm sorry?
	If you do me a favor, I don't know what cruise ship what time.
	So if you'll help me in, say, October cruise with Mama or the New Year's Eve trip with his sisters.
	I'll be able to, we can communicate.
	I just don't know what ship.
	October Cruise with Mama.
	That's what I'm talking about.
	He paid for the cruise and the flights for that trip.
	So he called his cruise agent and he booked that through them because he has a cruise agent.
	He also has a regular.
	Uh, agent.
	I don't know the cruise agent's name.
	So I wasn't asking about his travel agent.
	I was just asking if he paid for those.
	He did not, though.
	Okay.
	Because the reason I consider that he did not is I gave him his money back.
	And I was about to ask that.
	But initially, he paid for that.
	Yeah, he called his cruise agent.
	Like, I think they have his card on record.
	They do whatever.
	Okay.
	So initially, he paid for the cruise and the flight to Miami and the Royal Caribbean cruise.
	And my understanding of that October cruise is, like, it was a package the lady did for him.
	Okay.
	And I'll get to the reimbursements and all that.
	I'm just trying to confirm.
	He paid for the flight and the cruise in October.
	And I think that when you say things that way, I want this record to be abundantly clear that he calls his travel agent, he calls his cruise agent.
	They do whatever he tells them.
	He's like on a first-name basis with these people.
	They do it, and then he tells me how much it is, and I give him the money back.
	Just like you're asking me about the money with Robin, I don't do my friends like that.
	So if you tell me it's a G, then you're going to get $1,000.
	Whatever it is, I didn't ever make him produce receipts to me.
	Whatever he told me it was, I gave him the money back.
	Isn't it true that he paid for the cruise and the flight on his credit card?
	I'm not asking about reimbursement or after.
	He used his credit card to buy the cruise and buy the flight, correct?
	I have no idea how he paid for it, if it's a credit card, if it's a debit card, but certainly he called his cruise agent.
	You know, like how many people have a cruise agent?
	He calls his cruise agent, tells them where they want to go.
	They tell them what's booked.
	You have to remember, he didn't just, he paid for that initial was me, him, and his mother.
	And then after that cruise, you all flew to Aruba and spent a couple days in a hotel there, correct?
	Right.
	And his mother was not happy.
	He initially paid for that.
	He initially paid for that.
	For Aruba.
	Yes, ma 'am.
	So let's talk about both of those.
	I know he initially paid for it.
	Did you pay him back?
	For the cruise and for Aruba.
	Yeah, I gave him his money before we ever went on that trip.
	You gave him cash before you ever went on the trip?
	Mm-hmm.
	Okay.
	And so when you got cash to pay him back on these trips, would you go to the ATM?
	No, lady.
	You would not go to the ATM?
	No.
	Okay.
	So Fulton County pays you direct deposit, I assume?
	Yes.
	Fulton County and the state of Georgia both pay me direct deposits.
	Okay.
	So the cash that you would pay him, you wouldn't get it out of the bank?
	I have money in my house.
	You have money in your house?
	So it was just money that was there?
	When you meet my father, he's going to tell you as a woman, you should always have, which I don't have, so let's don't tell him that, you should have at least six months in cash at your house at all times.
	Now, I don't know why this old black man feels like that, but he does.
	When we were growing up, my daddy had three safes in the house.
	So my father's bought me a lockbox.
	And I always keep cash in the house.
	Now, I don't do it to the degree that my father would do it.
	So he would probably be ashamed with me.
	But I always have cash at the house.
	That has been, I don't know, all my life.
	If you're a woman and you go on a date with a man, you better have $200 in your pocket.
	So if that man acts up, you can go where you want to go.
	So I keep cash in my house.
	And I don't keep cash as good in my purse like I used to.
	I don't go on many dates.
	When you go on a date, you should have cash in your pocket.
	So my question was, where did that cash originally come from, if it didn't come out of the bank?
	Cash is fungible.
	I had cash for years in my house.
	So for me to tell you the source of where it comes from, when you go to Publix and you buy something, you get $50, you throw it in there.
	It's been my whole life.
	When I took out a large amount of money on my first campaign, I kept some of the cash of that.
	Like, to tell you...
	I just have cash in my house.
	I don't have as much today as I would normally have, but I'm building back up now.
	So you just put money in.
	It's a very good practice.
	I would advise it to all women.
	So you can't identify when you came into this cash or where the cash came from?
	I didn't say I couldn't identify it.
	Nobody gives me anything.
	I am sure that the source of the money is always the word sweat and tears of me.
	What you asked me for is...
	When did the money go in there?
	What I am trying to tell you is, so I got divorced in 2005 from my husband.
	No, no, no.
	It's important.
	You said, where did the money come from?
	And I need to tell you where the money came from.
	And so for many, many years, I have kept money in my house.
	That money in my worst days has probably only been $500 or $1,000.
	At my best days, I probably had $15,000 in my house of cash.
	At all times, there's going to be cash in my house.
	Or wherever I'm laying my head.
	The money that you paid, Mr. Wade, the cash in October of 2022, you do not know where that money came from.
	I do know where it came from.
	It came from my sweat and tears.
	You know which job it came from.
	Did it come from Fulton County or did it come from a private job?
	It came from, I don't, I'm not a, what are you talking about?
	So it could have come from a private job because before I was VA, I was in private practice.
	So I earned money during that time period.
	It's probably, you know, it could have.
	What do you mean I don't know where it came from?
	I understand the situation.
	We can move on.
	Okay, thanks.
	Same with Aruba.
	You don't know where that cash came from either, right?
	Ma 'am, you are mischaracterizing my testimony greatly.
	I'm not going to allow you to mischaracterize my testimony.
	I know that I keep money in my house.
	The amounts of money I gave Mr. Wade...
	It was never that serious.
	I don't think I've ever handed him more than $2,500 in a reimbursement.
	So we're not talking about $20,000 in cash.
	I don't have $20,000 in cash right now.
	The most I ever gave him, I know I gave him $2,500 when we went to Belize because we went to one...
	And then we went to a second hotel.
	That $2,500, I actually gave him while we were still in the Leeds.
	I know that the Aruba trip, the one that you described with his mom, I think I gave him about $2,000 for that trip for like total.
	His mom went to Aruba with you?
	The Aruba trip.
	So I consider that to be one trip.
	So we got off of a cruise ship and then we went to Aruba, which is why I cannot remember is that the time that we had to stay in Miami to wait for the flight for Aruba.
	So I consider that one trip that we didn't like come back to Atlanta and leave.
	We flew down to Miami.
	We got on a cruise ship.
	We spent a couple of days with his mama.
	We came back to Miami.
	When we came back to Miami, either that day or the next day, we flew to Aruba.
	We spent a few days in Aruba and we came back.
	That was really one trip.
	Even though we went two places, it was one trip.
	So let's talk about the California trip.
	Is that when you were moving your daughter out to California?
	When you all went, or did you have two trips to California?
	My daughter doesn't live in California.
	Did she ever live in California?
	I'm not discussing to you the location of my child.
	So how many times did you go with Mr. Wade to California?
	Once.
	And you all stayed in Napa Valley and he paid for the plane tickets and the hotel?
	He paid for the plane tickets and the hotel.
	And what did you pay for on that trip?
	I gave him much less cash that time, probably four or five hundred dollars, and then I paid for a bunch of stuff.
	I think we did.
	Two different wine tours that you do, which are pretty expensive.
	I think I bought him.
	He likes wine.
	I don't really like wine, to be honest with you.
	I like Grey Goose.
	I bought him a bottle of wine while we were there and the sippings that you do.
	I can't remember how many, like four or five different places you go.
	I remember we went to...
	To this place that they do pairings.
	That was the most expensive thing that I think that we did while we were there.
	So they would pair champagne, chocolate, and caviar.
	It was a three, and it was like three different things.
	Sweden, Russia, someplace else.
	I'll make that up.
	But that was the most expensive thing we did that trip, and I paid for that.
	Did you pay cash?
	For us doing that?
	Yeah.
	But that trip did not cost me a lot of money.
	I might have took like $750 in cash on me because we weren't gone very long.
	I'd only ask if you paid in cash.
	I don't need another email.
	When I travel, I always take cash.
	And is the cash that you keep in your house or do you keep it at the condo that you're living in?
	So at that point, it wouldn't be at my house.
	And I'm sorry if I was not cleared.
	The money would be wherever I laid my head.
	So I wouldn't leave the money at the house.
	So if I was unclear, no.
	Money is going to be where I stay.
	How much did you pay for your trip to Panama?
	To where?
	Panama, I believe.
	I didn't go to Panama.
	I may have the location wrong.
	I never went to Panama.
	So Wade went to Panama with his frat brother.
	Oh, he went to Panama with those frat brothers.
	So tell me about, let's see.
	So I want to make sure I've got them.
	I've got Belize.
	You already covered Belize.
	You covered the...
	So let me tell you our real trips.
	In October, we went with, we went on the cruise with his mom.
	We got back from the cruise with his mom and we went to Aruba.
	I consider that one trip.
	Second trip.
	New Year's Eve, we went on a cruise to the Bahamas.
	That's the second trip.
	I want to make sure I get this right.
	Third trip.
	100% on me.
	I think he might have spent $200 on that entire trip.
	We went to Belize.
	That was my trip.
	That was, you know, his 50th.
	And then Napa Valley, we went around May.
	I don't know the dates, but it seems to me like it was close to Mother's Day.
	And those are the only trips.
	So that the record is complete.
	I can remember one time.
	Driving to South Carolina and we met my sister for lunch with her man.
	I don't know, but we didn't stay the night there.
	But I guess people would consider that a trip if you drive somewhere and you come back.
	That was insane because it was like five hours to drive.
	We ate lunch and we drove right back.
	I can remember driving to some little town in Georgia.
	I don't even know where I was.
	I had never been there before or after.
	There's some boats you can get on over to, and they're like a slave thing.
	If that gives anyone any reference, we didn't do that.
	I remember doing that.
	I remember driving one time to Charlotte.
	We had lunch with one of my very close girlfriends.
	And again, we drove to Charlotte, met my girlfriend for lunch, and drove right back.
	So that's a trip.
	We didn't stay the night there, but I just want to be complete in my testimony.
	We drove someplace, had lunch, drove back.
	I don't remember another driving someplace distant for lunch and coming back to Charlotte to see a girlfriend, to meet my sister in South Carolina.
	We went by ourselves when I told you about that remote place in Georgia.
	We could have driven someplace else and had lunch and came back.
	That's all that comes to my recollection right now.
	There could have been another place we drove and had lunch.
	My security team was very clear to me.
	I'm not to be out and about in Atlanta without them.
	And so for me to do something just very normal that a normal person would get to do if they weren't prosecuting this case, I got to drive four hours to do it.
	And that's what I was going to ask you.
	Your security detail, did they take you to and from your house?
	They take, well, so I haven't been able to enjoy my home.
	Condo, I'm sorry.
	Where you lay your head?
	Do they take you to and from where you lay your head?
	99% of the time.
	Would they take Mr. Wade to and from wherever you laid your head?
	That has never in the history of ever happened.
	Ever, okay?
	Your security team has never taken him?
	From my house?
	That's a lie.
	Ask them if they've ever taken him.
	And I'm telling you that that's never happened.
	She's melting down.
	My security team has never taken Mr. Wade from any place where I have lived and brought him here.
	Never.
	Not once.
	Not ever.
	Have they ever taken the two of you together?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		She's losing it.
unidentified		Anywhere.
unidentified		We've left this building and gone to lunch.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		She's freaking out.
unidentified		That is a very rare occasion, I am sure.
		And let me be clear.
		It wouldn't just be Mr. Wade.
		So I'm sure my security team has taken me to lunch.
		Probably been a time I've left here, 7 o 'clock, going to get something to eat.
		And I don't even know that they would have taken him or if he would have driven himself.
		But they've taken me to do that.
		But we're talking...
		Very few, very far in between.
		Most days, I don't even eat lunch.
		And when I do, it's because my assistant has heated up some bag, something, and I eat through meetings and eat in my office.
		It's not a practice of mine to go to lunch.
		During the time period that you were dating, would your security team ever take you two together anywhere?
		No.
		Never?
		If there was a lunch that occurred that I just described, if there was a meal that occurred that I just described.
		Anything outside of that, and it needs to be very clear.
		Not often.
		Once, twice.
		Because I want to be over-inclusive, I'm saying once or twice.
		I'm not certain that it happened, but I'd rather be over-inclusive with you.
		So, your office objected to us getting Delta records for flights that you may have taken when Mr. Wade.
		Well, no, no, no, look.
		I object to you getting records.
		You've been...
		Intrusive into people's personal lives.
		You're confused.
		You think I'm on trial.
		These people are on trial for trying to steal an election in 2020.
		I'm not on trial, no matter how hard you try to put me on trial.
		Do you have any problem?
		I object to getting any personal records of mine.
		We're not dealing with privilege through a witness.
		No, no, no.
		I'm not dealing with privilege.
		We had offered to put them in camera for the court to review, and I just want to know if she has any problem.
		I'm gonna do it with a witness.
		You have to file for your job something called the Income and Financial Disclosure Report, correct?
		That's correct.
		And you filed your first one.
		So you filed two today?
		Is that right?
		Is it two or three?
		I probably would have filed 21, 22. Maybe I haven't filed 23 yet because isn't it due like June of the next year?
		April, I believe.
		So you filed your first one.
		It looks like April 15, 2022.
		And your second one...
		April 17, 2023.
		Does that sound familiar?
		I don't remember the dates, but you're an officer of the court.
		I'm going to hope you're telling the truth now.
		May I approach the witness?
		You're right.
		Thank you.
		I already gave the state a copy to Exhibits 20 and 21. Can somebody bring me some?
		Yeah.
		I forget the law.
		Yes, ma 'am.
		Those are the ones that you filed.
		This looks like me for sure.
		Yes, ma 'am.
		Yes, ma 'am.
		Judge, we'd move to admit 20 and 20. I think you need to delineate which ones when.
	20 is 2021, so it accounts for the time period, Your Honor, January the 1st, 2021 through December the 31st, 2021.
	That is Defendants Exhibit 20. Defendants Exhibit 2021, it accounts for the time period January the 1st, 2022 through December the 1st of 2022.
	All right, any objection to Exhibits 20 and 21?
	Nope.
	Sorry.
	From other counsel, admitted without objection.
	When did your relationship, your personal relationship with Mr. Wade end?
	Our personal relationship ended in this year.
	So let's be very clear so that we don't mix words.
	I don't want to mix words in here.
	Mr. Wade is my friend right now.
	Mr. Wade, I would say, has been my friend since 2020.
	I think he started out as like a mentor and a professional colleague.
	He became my friend and somebody that I really respected.
	I feel very indebted to Mr. Wade for taking on the task of this job.
	And he is certainly my friend and one of the people that I respect the most.
	So if you ask about a personal relationship...
	I consider myself to have a personal relationship right now, Mr. Wade.
	I consider myself to have a personal relationship with Anna Cross.
	I consider myself to have a personal relationship with Mr. Abadi.
	I consider myself to have a personal relationship with Andrew Evans.
	Okay, let me just clarify that.
	I have a personal relationship with him as we speak right now.
	I don't think that's what you're asking.
	I think that's what you're asking.
	When did your romantic relationship with Mr. Wade end?
	Did it end?
	Me and Mr. Wade...
	We are good friends.
	My respect for him has grown over these seven weeks of attacks.
	We are very good friends.
	I think but for these attacks, it would have been a friendship that as life goes, he would have stopped having.
	I think that you have cemented that we'll be friends to the day we die.
	I can handle Mr. Seda.
	She asked about a personal relationship.
	She asked when the romantic relationship ended.
	That's the question.
	Sometime in, I'd say late summer of 2023.
	I don't believe me and this is what you're really asking about.
	This is the salaciousness of all of this, right?
	No, I'm just asking about your romantic relationship when you stop dating.
	I think that me and Mr. Wade...
	So he's a man.
	He probably would say June or July.
	I would say we had a tough conversation in August.
	So that men in relationships at the end of physical intimacy, women in relationships when that tough conversation takes place.
	And where did he come to, I guess, the condo?
	I'm not sure what you call the condo apartment.
	Would he come and stay at that condo or visit you there?
	I'm sorry, visit you there.
	What condo?
	What apartment?
	I want to be clear.
	So, not your house.
	I know you classified one as house and one as condo, so I'm trying to use those terms.
	See, what you don't understand is because of this case, I've got to move.
	And so, I...
	If you could ask a more precise question.
	Yes, please.
	Give me the time period.
	Mr. Wade visits you at the place you laid your head.
	When?
	Has he ever visited you at the place you laid your head?
	So, let's be clear because you've lied in this.
	Let me tell you which one you lied in.
	Right here.
	I think you're lying right here.
	No, no, no, no.
	This is the truth, Judge.
	It is a lie.
	It is a lie.
	You see.
	Mr. Say Now, thank you.
	We're going to take five minutes.
	We'll do that in five.
	Wait, stay on the shot.
	What's she going to do?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Is she going to spontaneously combust?
		What's happening?
		She's losing her mind.
		Oh, look at her march away!
		Oh my god!
		This is better than any soap opera I've ever watched.
		This is better than the OJ trial.
		This is better than anything that we have ever broadcast live.
		This is remarkable.
		Wow!
unidentified		Wow!
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Holy smokes!
		Okay.
		So Fanny Willis just came out snapping.
		Losing her mind.
		Seizure.
		An unhinged meltdown.
		So bad.
		So bad.
		And by the way, I'm seeing the Super Chats here.
		We're doing our best with the audio.
		Rolls-Royce is telling me that he's going to fix the audio.
		Or at least he's going to do his best to bump it.
		We have it cranked up, so I apologize.
		I am trying my hardest.
		I even have a pen and paper so that I don't talk at all.
		I can't help myself from laughing.
		I am literally falling out of my chair, crying, watching Fannie Willis, like, lose her mind.
		And yes, Trump's mugshot is smiling behind me.
		I'll show it to you.
		I can show you Trump's mugshot.
		Thank you, Fannie.
		Thank you, big Fannie.
		Trump's mugshot is absolutely smiling behind me.
		Holy smokes.
		Okay, Royce, we're going to play that clip of MSNBC saying that it's over.
		MSNBC has straight up admitted that Fannie's done.
		The left has now officially abandoned her, along with CNN, and we're grabbing that clip too.
		CNN and MSNBC have both said, and remember, Fannie, big Fannie, is gonna come clomping back into the courthouse, having a meltdown.
		We have a bunch of Fannie meltdown clips for you.
		My major takeaway from all of this is that Fannie Willis knows she's finished.
		Ladies and gentlemen, she knows she's done.
		She knows it's over.
		And the best that she can do right now, the best that she can do right now is try desperately to save her career, to save herself from being federally prosecuted because that's what's next.
		This is not something...
		Have you ever watched this?
		Man, it's unbelievable.
		Tom Fitton from Judicial Watch is DMing us.
		See if he's available.
		By the way, ALX, it'd be great to get Tom on the stream.
		Tom Fitton from Judicial Watch is so very good.
		It'd be really fun to see if we can't pop him on the show.
		Okay.
		You don't...
		In a trial like this, you don't take the stand.
		Okay?
		And if you do take the stand as a witness, you don't do it if you're being emotionally manipulated, if you're losing your mind, if you're holding stuff up and screaming and throwing things.
		As Fannie Willis just did?
		You don't do it if you can't respect the court?
		Or if you, like, call people lady?
		Do we have this clip?
		Of her saying, no, lady.
		Her snapping.
		You don't take the stand if you are an emotional basket case and unable to control yourself.
		Are we back?
		Okay, ladies and gentlemen.
		She's sitting down.
		Okay.
		Sorry we couldn't get to all the news.
		We have so much news for you.
		We have some...
		Big time people that are watching the stream right now.
		Tell your friends.
		Let's go.
		Let's crank this thing up.
	Let's crank this thing up.
	We're going to do super chats.
	Let's crank this thing up.
	I want 30,000 people on the stream.
unidentified		Oh.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Let's go, baby.
		We right now, across all platforms, have nearly 30,000 people watching.
		I love you all.
		We've been live for five...
		Five hours.
		Five hours.
		We've been sitting here live.
		God bless you for sticking with us.
		We will stick with you.
		Big Fannie Willis in the chair.
		Big Fannie Willis.
		Taking, sitting in the chair.
		Losing her minds.
		Snapping, yelling, screaming.
		Having an apoplectic seizure on TV.
		melting down with salty, salty liberal tears pouring from her face as much as the salt was pouring from Loverboy's hot dog.
unidentified		Thank you.
unidentified		There she is.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Frumpy Fanny.
		MSNBC and CNN are both saying that it's over.
		Oh, man.
		Oh, man.
		I cannot believe it.
		Her demeanor, her body language, the way she's talking, even the way she's sitting.
		What a grotesque crook.
		What a degenerate criminal.
		Fannie Willis is the one who needs to be charged on a RICO case.
		Fannie Willis is clearly the organized crime lord here.
		Fannie Willis was clearly taking money from the county, pulling it out of an ATM, and shoving it under her mattress.
		She straight up admitted to it.
		Fannie Willis is the one who's money laundering.
		Fanny Willis is the one who's part of a RICO case.
		This is a RICO case about her and Loverboy.
		Nathan's hot dog roller.
		Breathtaking.
		Breathtaking.
		Here's the judge.
		The judge just had to tell everyone to take five minutes.
		Hold.
		The judge had to tell everyone to take five minutes because Fanny had a meltdown.
		And started throwing documents.
unidentified		We're back on the record.
		Before we proceed, though, I'd advise everyone here, this being a room mostly full of lawyers who have spent their lives in a courtroom.
		We all know what professionalism looks like, what decorum looks like, and devoting ourselves to the rule of law and proper advocacy.
		I would urge everyone to keep those principles in their mind.
		Starting with the fact that we won't talk over each other.
		And from there, we'll get through this.
		Ms. Merchant.
		How often did Mr. Wade visit you at a place where you were living between 2019 and 2021?
		Do you want to start with the lie that he lived with me?
		In South Fulton in 2019, the home he's never been to, that's one lie you told in your document.
		Judge, I didn't ask her about that.
		Ms. Merchant, I want you to ask a very precise question.
		I think she's saying and answering that he did not live with her, so why don't we break that up into smaller parts?
		I didn't ask about living.
		But you put in your, while we're talking about professionalism, no, while we're talking about professionalism, you put in three different documents he lived with me for.
		And filed that with the court.
		In 2019?
		He's never been to South Fulton.
		In 2019, I lived in South Fulton.
		He has never been to my residence in 2019.
		Not once.
		In 2019, he's never been to your residence.
		Anyplace.
		I lived in my home in South Fulton before I started getting the threats that We're here.
		A house I paid for with my own sweat and tears.
		I'm no longer able to live there.
		But in 2019, I did.
		And in the two months of 2019 that I knew Mr. Wade, three months, the beginning of October, all of November, and all of December, Mr. Wade never came to my house in South Fulton.
		Let me help you out.
		I lived there in 2020.
		He never came to my house in 2020, let alone live with me, as you put falsely in these documents.
		In the first three months of 2021, when I could still enjoy my home, Mr. Wade never came to South Fulton, and it is certainly a lie that he lived with me.
		So in 2020, let's, so you said 2019, 2020.
		Did Mr. Wade ever visit you at a place that you resided?
		He has never been to my home in South Fulton.
		2020 was before I knew that a phone call was going to be made and I was going to have to abandon my home.
		As a result thereof, he never visited, lived at, came to, or has seen South Fulton.
		You qualified that with your home in South Fulton.
		That's where I lived in 2020.
		2020, did he ever visit you at a place that you resided?
		She's unhinged.
		In 2020, I lived in South Fulton.
		That's the only place I lived in South Fulton.
		That's before I had to abandon my home, Judge.
		And at my home in South Fulton, he never came there, okay?
		So if you don't come someplace, you can't live there.
		I'm going to have to caution.
		That's going to be my first time I have to caution.
		I'm going to have to listen to the questions as asked.
		And if this happens again and again, I'm going to have no choice but to strike your testimony.
		I'm going to break this down.
		This merchant's question, I believe, is asking whether you lived anywhere other than South.
		I lived anywhere but South Fulton, Georgia in 2020.
		That is before I began my prosecution of this case, and it was my plan to only live there.
		Did Mr. Wade ever visit you at the condo that you leased from Ms. Yurdy?
		He visited that condo, yes.
		He did?
		Yes.
		Did he ever spend the night at that condo?
		No.
		Yeah, but he did visit for sure.
		Did you ever go out to eat together other than the lunches you talked about during 2019 or 2020?
		I would think that we probably went to lunch, but it wouldn't have been.
		Let me think.
	2019.
	I'm going to say, I don't know.
	I'm going to say we probably broke bread someplace in 2019.
	I don't remember it, but it seems like we would have broke bread sometime in 2019.
	So I'm going to say yes, although I have no recollection.
	But it seems to me like I go out to eat and drink with pretty much everyone, so I'm going to say yes.
	I'll talk about the vacations that we've already talked about.
	Did you ever go out to dinner with Mr. Waite?
	I mentioned to you that I will...
	I'm going to object as to what time period.
	We're asking very vague questions.
	I thought we were treating the witness as possible under 611.
	We're no longer doing that.
	So we're going to go back and forth.
	We need to be more specific with our questions if we're going to treat her as possible.
	All right, Ms. Merchant, it's not so much.
	I think you can elect between leading and open-ended questions, but I think we are still wondering about.
	I think we need to get back on track of focusing on the financial benefit or the relationship.
	And my next question about if you did go out to dinner, who paid when you went out to dinner?
	He paid.
	I paid.
	You both paid.
	Okay, so let me be real clear.
	We didn't say, oh, the bill is $102.
	You get $51, I'll get $51.
	I don't operate like that with my girlfriends.
	I don't operate like that with anyone.
	He caught the bill.
	I caught the bill.
	Whomever.
	Did you ever pay him through cash app?
	No.
	You only ever paid him through cash.
	Well, yes.
	We're talking about, I'm very confused now.
	You've never given Mr. Wade money through cash out.
	No.
	The only money you've ever given him outside of a contract is cash.
	I didn't give him money in a contract, so that was cute, but I didn't give him money in a contract.
	What happened is, no, we're going to answer it since you said it.
	He worked more hours than he was paid, and the county paid him for the work that he did.
	So, don't be cute with me.
	And then think that you're not going to get an answer.
	And I will ask you about the contract in a minute.
	I asked you about cash.
	Did you ever pay him anything?
	And I'm trying to qualify my questions.
	I'm not talking about the contract at Fulton County that was paid.
	I'm not talking about that.
	I'm talking about outside of that.
	Did you ever pay him anything other than cash?
	I've only given him cash a few times in the course of what we're talking about.
	If we would go to dinner, I wouldn't give him cash because he paid for dinner or I paid for dinner.
	I've given him cash only a few times in life, probably four.
	Probably the most money I've ever handed him is $2,500.
	The least amount of money I've handed him is probably between $500 and $1,000.
	You never wrote him a check?
	Ma 'am, I don't have checks.
	So you have no proof of any reimbursement for any of these things because it was all cash, right?
	The testimony of one witness is enough to prove a fact.
	Are you telling me that I'm lying to you?
	Is that what you're intimating right here?
	I'm asking if you have any proof that you paid him.
	The proof is what I just told you.
	You have no written proof.
	Is that correct?
	So I have some...
	Probably some transactions like in Belize.
	I probably spent $500 on my card in Belize.
	I spent, I can't remember, $900 on each of our tickets to go to Belize.
	I did the $700.
	I probably got some minor expenses in Aruba that would be on a card.
	But for the most part, for those trips, other than, so the two cruises, I gave him money for those before we ever left.
	Let me answer.
	Well, the question was if you had any written proof.
	So I've answered you, that I've had written proof.
	We can move to the next question, if you've answered, if you have any written proof, and that was my question.
	I want to make sure that we're clear, that for the two cruises...
	Judge, I asked if she gave them written proof.
	We're not going to talk over the show.
	Ms. Merchant, she answered your question, so we can ask the next question.
	Ms. Cross will have plenty of opportunities to let you clarify your answers when it's her turn.
	Thank you, Judge.
	Knowing your role as district attorney.
	You know that public funds are scrutinized and money is scrutinized and things like that.
	You understand you're under a microscope.
	You have reporting requirements, all of those types of things.
	You have no record other than your testimony of the money that you've given us.
	You've already asked that question.
	Let's keep going.
	When you took office, you had a tax lien of $4,600.
	Did you pay that with cash when you made that tax lien hole?
	I probably paid through however you pay.
	Okay.
	But you were saying that you had amounts of cash.
	You still had that lien in 2022 when you were dating Wade and going on these trips.
	So the cash that you gave him, that could have been used to pay this tax lien off?
	Are you going to tell me how to pay my bills?
	I'm going to object.
	This is not relevant as it makes you.
	Mr. Merchant, are you trying to establish that she was insolvent in some way?
	Definitely was trying to establish that she did not have these mass amounts of cash that she's talking about.
	Yes.
	All right.
	Re-ask the question.
	You had a tax lien in 2022.
	$4,600.
	Did you say I did?
	And you did not use this cash that you had to reimburse Mr. Wade to pay that off, correct?
	No.
	I went shopping, too, when I didn't pay it off.
	And you talked about...
	What?
	I would not characterize it as a lot.
	I probably have spoken to them two or three times.
	I think it's already come up.
	Finances are discussed in the book.
	I'll rule that.
	Thank you.
	Ms. Willis, you can continue your answer.
	I came up with Mr. Wade in some of his hearsay statements that he was asked about in relation to what Ms. Willis may or may not have said in relation to an author.
	So it's not relevant to the testimony that's occurring.
	I think Ms. Murchin has said that inside the book, she also makes a statement as to her own finances, and that's an issue.
	So you gave interviews to the authors of this book, correct?
	Once or twice.
	Okay.
	Just to be comprehensive, I don't know if it was three times, two or three times, I think.
	You were quoted in the book, and I will give you a chance to say if this is a misquote, you were quoted when they asked you about if you wanted to run for...
	office for da you were quoted i really don't want to be financially effed up again do you remember saying that so what that refers to so that my question first is if you remember saying that i remember saying something similar to that but i would like to be able to explain what that's in reference to that's not um In reference to anything else.
	It was a huge sacrifice to be district attorney in Fulton County.
	Huge.
	I was doing just fine.
	I had a municipal court judgeship that was paying me a hundred something thousand dollars a year and like you got to show up twice a week.
	Easiest thing I've ever done in life.
	I also had private clients that were paying me to represent them.
	So I was able to have a law practice in that.
	Raising two daughters by myself.
	There were times in life where things were hard.
	And so I was telling people, I don't really run for DA.
	I don't want to run for DA.
	I'm in a good position right now.
	I got this easy job that I enjoy being the chief judge of the city of South Fulton.
	I'm making money at the law firm.
	And I'm not sure that I want to make this sacrifice.
	And why does it always have to be me?
	Eventually, I prayed.
	I think that I was the appropriate person.
	I think that I did that.
	So when you're referring to that, what I'm saying is, why should I make a sacrifice again?
	And what I was not talking about is being district attorney.
	Once you get elected district attorney, you're in a fine financial position.
	I make over $200,000 a year.
	What I was talking about is, I ran for judge.
	When I ran for judge, I took $50,000 of my personal money out of my retirement.
	And that money...
	Ended up being lost.
	And I know when you bet on yourself, you're going to have to bet money on yourself.
	And so what I was talking about was not wanting to go through the personal financial expense of running for office.
	By no means did I think that I was going to be financially in a bad position once I won.
	Let's talk about what I was up against because it's important to understand that comment.
	I had a district attorney who had been here for 24 years.
	It's very relevant as to what my mindset was about this, so I'm trying to answer your question.
	Right, but it is about my finances.
	Nobody put me in this seat, so I had already run for office once.
	I had spent $50,000 of my own money running, and it was vamoose, nothing.
	And so when I'm talking to those officers, I'm talking about the contemplation of the sacrifice of the run, not the sacrifice of once you become DA.
	The odds were against me.
	I was likely going to lose the election based on who I was running against.
	So that needs to be in the appropriate context.
	Isn't it true that the authors also wrote, and you can dispute this if you'd like, that you were broke after that race?
	The 2018 race?
	Yes.
	That was a hard race.
	I wasn't broke like I didn't have any.
	So broke is relative to depending where you are, but that hurt to lose that $50,000.
	So I'm sure my mental mindset was like...
	I just gave $50,000 away.
	Right.
	So they characterized it from their conversations with you that you were broke.
	You had poured your own money into the campaign and you weren't able to pay your own bills because of your, I'm sorry, your clients couldn't pay their bills to you and you had a paltry array of family and asset forfeiture cases.
	It says you were trying to make it month to month.
	Is that an accurate depiction of your financial situation at that point?
	I would want to read that, but I don't remember clients not being able to pay their bills.
	May I approach this question?
	You can.
	You may.
	I have not read this book.
	So like this fact here, her ex-husband Fred had run into a financial, I have no information about that.
	I didn't ask you about that.
	I just asked about if you were, what they represent from their interview that you were broke and that you had clients that weren't able to pay their bills.
	Can you show me where that is?
	Because this is where you put the tab, so that's where I read.
	Broke, but didn't pay their bills.
	Yeah, that, I'm sure I characterized myself as broke as leaving that $50,000.
	I don't know that I had, Her nascent law practice at Paltry Array.
	I didn't have...
	I didn't...
	I thought I had a law practice.
	So this is not correct.
	I'm sure it's just...
	I didn't have any asset forfeiture cases.
	So I had one case where they had took one of my client's money at the airport.
	I don't know if that's what they're...
	I don't know.
	Paltry Array.
	I did have family law cases.
	I guess that's what they're talking about.
	And...
	Clients who couldn't pay their bills ain't clients, so no.
	So my question was just if this was a fair and accurate representation where it says you were trying to make it month to month at that point.
	No, I don't think that that is actually a fair and accurate representation, but I am certain that after the 2018 election, I'm still not really happy about having given up that $50,000.
	You know when you paid your tax lien?
	I don't.
	You don't?
	Do you know if you paid it?
	I know I've paid some taxes, I don't know.
	Did you tell anyone at Fulton County Board of County Commissioners about your relationship with Mr. Waite?
	No.
	Did you disclose your relationship to anybody at Fulton County?
	No, I don't think so.
	And as the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of Fulton County, I assume that you're familiar with the county code and ordinances?
	I've said we're not going to cover that.
	This hearing was emerging.
	I'm sorry, Judge?
	I think we said we weren't going to cover the county regulations.
	Okay.
	I won't.
	Let me ask you this then.
	So are you aware that you're required to disclose any relationship with someone that you contract with in Fulton County?
	Would this be different because it's potential for impeachment?
	Yes.
	What did you ask me?
	Ms. Murchin, if you could re-ask the question.
	Okay.
	Are you aware that Fulton County requires you to disclose any relationship with someone that you're doing business with?
	I'm not aware, and I know often that things are confused with state constitutional officers in County, but I'm not aware.
	Okay, so it's your understanding that you don't have a duty to disclose the relationship.
	She's going to answer that question.
	Let's keep going.
	Um.
	Did you keep track of this cash that you paid him at all?
	What are you talking?
	I don't understand.
	Did you keep track?
	Did you keep a ledger?
	Did you keep track of it?
	Well, I've only given him cash, as I mentioned, three or four times.
	There's no ledger.
	This is friends handing money off to each other.
	So the answer is no.
	I think you've already asked whether there was any written proof whatsoever.
	She's answered that.
	Okay.
	So we've covered this.
	Let's move on.
	Who are you referring to when you suggested that Mr. Roman's motion to disqualify was racially motivated?
	We already said we're not talking about the forensic misconduct that's been alleged.
	And just so the record is clear, I don't believe I said that his motion was racially motivated, so I don't want that to stay there.
	I've never said his motion was racially motivated, so that should not be true.
	I think it would be best if we don't need to go down that road.
	We're going to save that for argument.
	You once said that you would not engage with a personal relationship with anyone that worked for Fulton County.
	Is that correct?
	An employee?
	Anyone that worked for Fulton County.
	I think I said an employee.
	Okay.
	So that's the qualification you give an employee.
	I think that's the statement that I made.
	So if you want to quote me, quote me accurately.
	So it's your position because Mr. Wade was not an employee?
	Or it's your position he wasn't an employee, correct?
	Mr. Wade is not an employee and he will tell you that over and over again.
	I'm sorry, this statement just so I make sure I accurately quote you.
	What you said was you won't work, you won't sleep with people who work under you.
	Do you not consider Mr. Wade working under you?
	I consider Mr. Wade to be an agent.
	And a pointy is what I really would think of him as.
	Your point, whatever merit it has, Ms. Merchant, is on the record.
	Next question.
	Do we need any moments in a minute?
	Mr. Sado.
	No, I'm ready to go.
	Oh, man, here we go.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		That was the easy Inquisitor.
unidentified		Whoa.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Get ready, baby.
unidentified		I'm going to try to ask you questions that you can actually answer without having to explain.
		Okay?
		Yes, sir.
		My comprehension skills are pretty good, so we should do all right.
		We shall see.
		If I heard you correctly, you moved into what I will refer to as the Yurte condo in either March or April of 2021.
		Is that correct?
		Sometime between late February and April.
		Yes, I don't.
		Just so we're clear, yes.
		But in that time period, you're in the ballpark.
		We're in the ballpark.
		And is that ERT condo, would you say that it is in Hapeville?
		It is in Hapeville, yes, sir.
		And you moved in there for safety reasons?
		My father, yes, I moved in there.
		We were concerned.
		My father was terribly concerned about me continuing to live at the house.
		So they were clear.
		People came to my house at 5 o 'clock in the morning about the police brutality cases, saying I was going to have a wake-up call.
		There were security threats due to gang cases, and there were concerns due to the—that was at the very beginning of this, looking into that.
		And so for all of those reasons and what was happening, my father wanted me out the house, and begrudgingly, I left.
		Okay, so the answer to the question was yes for safety reasons, correct?
		Those were all of the things that caused the safety concerns.
		I'm sorry.
		I'm not questioning whether they are or not safety concerns.
		I just ask that you move into this condo, ERT condo, for safety reasons, right?
		Yes.
		At the time that you moved into the condo, be it from February to April of 2021, was your father still living in your house?
		Right, because my father...
		That's all I ask you.
		But I get to explain the answer, sir.
		I don't know if there's an explanation.
		If I ask you, was your father still living at your house, the answer is either he was...
		Or he wasn't.
		Yes, but you are going to get to argue at the end of this, as we both know.
		I'm not going to argue anything.
		I would like to be able to explain why.
		So yes, because my father is an older gentleman, he was worried about COVID, and he stayed.
		I'm going to have to say that a second time.
		Whenever we have to put a pause, we stop testifying, okay?
		You don't have a chance to explain yourself.
		The question was whether your father was not staying there at the time, and You're clarifying that in your answer as well.
		You can have a brief clarification, but it shouldn't be something that reaches well beyond the question.
		All right, Mr. Seidaw, you can re-ask the question.
		We'll see where it takes us.
		Okay, thank you, Your Honor.
		Was your father still living in your house at the time you moved to what I would refer to as a Yurti condo?
		Yes, sir.
		He was due to his concerns related to COVID.
		The safety concern was that there was potential danger at your house.
		Is that correct?
		Yes, my address had been exposed, so yes, there was concerns about potential danger at my house.
		Okay, so anyone staying at your house in the time period after you went to the Yerty condo was still in danger, correct?
		Yeah, well, no, no, no.
		It's your attorney, Ms. Willis.
		Sorry, Mr. Botti, your objection is speculation.
		I was able to understand it.
		I've got the objection, and then I have...
		I'll withdraw the objection.
		And I'm going to remember the question, so I can answer it.
		You can now that the objection's been withdrawn.
		Can you try to answer that question?
		Yes.
	There's still a safety concern for people staying at the house.
	Yes, I was very concerned about my father still living at the house.
	However, if you have dealt with an older gentleman, he was not leaving the house, despite my urging him that I thought he should leave as well.
	He did not want to leave the house because he was particularly worried at his age about COVID.
	But that became, I don't want to say, I was not happy with that decision of my father's, but I can't ultimately make him leave, and he stayed there too long, in my opinion.
	Okay, thank you.
	During that period that you left to go to the Yerty condo, did any of your children stay at your house?
	So, I don't...
	I don't think that they were there at that point.
	Certainly my baby wasn't there.
	I'm talking about this entire period.
	We're talking about, if I remember correctly, and you'll correct me, I'm sure, you said that you stayed there at what I would call the Yerty condo until January of 2022, correct?
	Yes.
	Okay, so I'm asking you in that period, which would be February to April of 2021, Until January of '22, did any of your children stay at your house?
	And you don't have to yell at me.
	I'm able to understand.
	So I would ask you to not yell at me.
	That being said, I don't actually expressly remember, but I can tell you, since I have left my home, there have been times my oldest daughter came in.
	But I can't tell you with certainty the time window that you've said.
	If they did or not, so I don't want to speculate to that, but there was some time that my oldest daughter came back.
	Whether it was that period or after I left the Yote residence, I'm not sure, okay?
	Okay, so if I continue to go into more detail on this, you're not going to be able to give me an answer of whether or not, in fact.
	Any of your children were still at the house or stayed at your house during that time period, correct?
	What I can give you clarity of, so that we are clear, is from the time I moved out in February-ish of 2021.
	After I left there, there was a time period that my oldest daughter came back.
	But if you're asking me, was it in that window or after, I just don't have a recollection of that because, you know, your kids come and they go.
	And so I don't remember the specific time period, and I apologize for that.
	Did your children ever stay with you at the Yurti condo?
	Like maybe a night.
	Like for a girl's night or something, but live with, no.
	Did anyone else stay with you at the Yurti condo, including Ms. Yurti?
	Never.
	Ms. Yurti never lived in the condo.
	She met her husband, and they moved.
	They weren't quite married, but they moved.
	Nobody ever lived with me in the condo.
	My word was stayed, not lived.
	Stayed with you at the condo.
	I guess I don't understand the distinction, but no one ever...
	I think my baby's my oldest child.
	I think she spent one night with me, maybe my oldest and my youngest.
	But I think that whole time I was in that place, other than that one night, I don't think anyone ever...
	It was a very lonely period in my life.
	I don't think anyone ever spent the night other than maybe one night.
	I remember a picture of my baby sitting on the couch in that place, and I'm thinking she spent that night.
	But just a very lonely time in life.
	Okay.
	We'll stay with the lonely theme just for a minute.
	Did Nathan Wade visit you?
	At the Yerty condo from the time you moved in until he was hired on November the 1st of 2021.
	So I moved out of that condo, but during that time period, yeah, I'm sure he came to visit.
	He came to visit.
	I can remember us going.
	I think the restaurant's lickety-split.
	I can remember him.
	Picking me up, going to Lickety Split and ordering some food and coming and sitting at my table and eating.
	So I remember times that he visited me at that condo, yes.
	Because you give us an approximation of how many times Mr. Wade visited you at the condo between the time you moved in and prior to November 1 of 2020.
	I don't think often, but I don't want to speculate.
	Can we say...
	More than five?
	More than ten?
	I'm going to tell you the problem I'm having here.
	Let's say more than ten, but I'm not sure that that's even accurate.
	He certainly has come and picked me up, wanted to grab some food to eat.
	I don't remember him being in that condo a lot.
	I'm sorry.
	You want a number, and what I don't want to do...
	You're giving me your current and best recollection is all I'm asking for.
	That's all I can give you, sir.
	How many times did any of the prosecution team, how many times did Anna Cross come to that condo between the time you moved in and November 1st of 2021?
	I don't think Anna's ever been to that condo.
	What about any other prosecutor that's involved in the prosecution of this case?
	I don't think any of them have.
	Just Mr. Wade?
	That's correct, sir.
	But it was a lonely time.
	Oh, my God.
	Yeah, that 2021.
	I have a lot of guilt about this time period in my life.
	Let me tell you why.
	But yes, it was a lonely time.
	I was very appreciative to the citizens for giving me this responsibility and this duty.
	But what I very, very quickly learned is that this is a very isolating job, and 2021 was a lonely time.
	I turned 50 in 2021.
	It's probably one of the worst birthdays I've ever had.
	I've spent it alone.
	So I have a clear recollection of 2021 being lonely.
	Did Mr. Wade ever come visit you at the condo, the time period I'm talking about, prior to November of 2021, when Ms. Yerty was at the condo?
	So Ms. Yerty and me, we didn't share the condo at the same time.
	So the answer would be no.
	Well, we never stayed there together, so it's an impossibility.
	It's an impossibility.
	Yeah.
	Now, Ms. Yerty, because we need to get clarification on this.
	Ms. Yerty stayed in that place.
	There may have been a time that me and Mr. Wade visited, like went and saw Ms. Yurty.
	But me and Ms. Yurty never lived there together.
	Just so we're clear.
	Well, maybe that was clear, but I'm going to have to try again.
	Okay.
	Was Ms. Yurty still living in the condo when you moved in?
	Not a day.
	Okay.
	So when I'm talking...
	That was another misrepresentation in this.
	We never lived together.
	I never lived with Ms. Yurty.
	My question, though, I'm trying to understand, that after you moved in...
	To the condo.
	Miss Yurti had been, she was out of the condo, right?
	She got a house.
	That's all I'm asking.
	She's not in the condo.
	She is, we never stay, Miss Yurti and I, never stay a day together in the condo.
	All of her stuff was out of the condo, and all my stuff, some of my stuff, not all of it, obviously, was moved into the condo.
	So we never stayed there together.
	No, sir.
	All right.
	So when I ask you about Mr. Wade visiting the condo, When you were staying there.
	Yes.
	Ms. Yurti wasn't staying there, correct?
	That would be correct, yes.
	She wouldn't be at the condo, correct?
	No, she would not have been.
	It would be you and Mr. Wade alone at the condo, correct?
	Yes.
	That is, there weren't any other witnesses to Mr. Wade and you at the condo, correct?
	Yes.
	No security?
	None of your security detail?
	She said it was just her and Mr. Wade.
	You've made your point, Mr. Sado.
	Let's move on to the next one.
	Yes, Your Honor.
	Who in the prosecution team, prior to, I guess, the motion being filed by defendant Roman, who in the prosecution team knew of your personal relationship, and now I'm talking romantic, with Mr. Wade?
	So, sir, I am extremely private.
	All I ask is who knew?
	If the answer is no one knew, that's fine.
	I ask you who knew.
	Answer it and then explain this with us.
	I am very private.
	When I supervised Mr. Body and Mr. McAfee, they didn't know who I was dating, but I can assure you I was dating somebody.
	So that I kept something private that's my private life is not any mystery to anyone.
	It's like a woman doesn't have the right to keep her private life private.
	And I'm speaking on this because there have been all these intimations.
	You should tell them to answer the question, Ms. Wells.
	I'm sorry, what was the question, Your Honor?
	Is there anyone else to know about it?
	And then you can explain.
	I don't know.
	I don't think so.
	I certainly didn't go out telling my business to the world.
	The best of your recollection, you didn't inform anyone on the prosecution team that the individual that you had chosen to lead the prosecution team had a personal relationship with you.
	Is that correct?
	That's inaccurate.
	Your question is inaccurate.
	She's losing it.
	The person I chose, we had a personal relationship.
	So we had a friendship.
	We have all these distinguishing factors.
	Remember, when I chose him in November of 21, First of all, let's get this straight.
	Mr. Wade was not actually my first choice.
	That's no insult to him.
	No, no, no.
	Because of the way you phrased the question, you said, when I chose him, I didn't inform people of a personal relationship.
	We have defined personal as romantic.
	It is an inaccurate way to state the question.
	And I will certainly restate it so it is very accurate.
	Okay.
	And please do not yell at me.
	You hired Mr. Wade.
	For the first time on November 1st of 2021, correct?
	November of 2021, yes, sir.
	Your testimony is, whether one accepts it or not, your testimony is that at the time you hired Mr. Wade, there had never been a romantic relationship with Mr. Wade before you hired him, correct?
	Yes, my testimony is that we were very good friends, but not...
	We're talking about sex, so let's just don't...
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, I'm not talking about...
unidentified		I'm saying romantic relationships doesn't necessarily have to be just sex.
		It can be dating.
		It can be holding hands.
		It can be any of those things that one might call romantic.
		I'm asking you whether or not prior to November 1st of 2021, there was a romantic relationship with Mr. Wade.
		It's very simple.
		It's either a yes or a no.
		I don't consider my relationship with him to be romantic before that.
		I'm not a hand holder, so no.
		That's fine.
		Beyond November 1st of 2020, 2021, excuse me.
		I understand your testimony.
		There was no romantic relationship with Mr. Wade until early in 2022, whether it be January or February or March, early in 2022, correct?
		I would say sometime between February and April.
		Yes, sir.
		Now, I'm asking you about that time period when it became romantic.
		Yes, sir.
		Thank you.
		You didn't see the need, if I understand, to tell any of the people on the prosecution team when you had established a romantic relationship with Mr. Wade that the lead prosecutor, that is the man that was basically...
		Giving orders to others was dating or having a romantic relationship with you, correct?
		I'm going to object to relevance.
		Just to prove or attempting to show that there is an issue on the credibility about the relationship, the failure to have informed anyone, anyone on her team that she was having a romantic relationship with the lead prosecutor, I suggest...
		Gives rise to that inference.
		That's the rub of this.
		The inference that they were concealing this because it was not as it's been characterized to the court, and that in fact it started earlier than what they say.
		All right, overall, let's sit down.
		I just want to make sure they were clear from at least 2020, me and Mr. Wade and friends.
		At least that time period.
		I'm not talking about...
		No, no, no.
		I just want to be clear because my credibility is being evaluated here, right?
		We were friends.
		We hung out prior to November of 2021.
		In November of 2021, I hired him.
		I do not consider our relationship to have become romantic until early of 2022 because I don't know what date and time.
		I'm saying sometime between February and April of 2022 and very early April of 2022 because I know that...
		The trip that I discussed with you was like the first week of 2022, that the relationship had become romantic.
		I hope that answered your question, but I can't have it where, you know, we're saying something differently.
		All right, so you've established the timeline as you put it.
		The question originally was, at the time, at that time, did you tell any other prosecutors?
		I never tell people at work whom I'm dating.
		All right, Mr. Seda.
		Did you take any trips to D.C. with Mr. Wade?
		Never.
		So do you have no, what I would call, personal trips or business trips to D.C. with Mr. Wade?
		I never went to D.C. with Mr. Wade.
		Personal, business, otherwise, never.
		I've never been in the District of Columbia with Mr. Wade or Maryland, Virginia, the DMV as they call it.
		So as I understand it, to be clear.
		Any trips that you would have taken to D.C.?
		That was a pretty clear answer.
		Huh?
		That was a pretty clear answer.
		She just said no.
		So do you have a variation or something new to bring up?
		I'll ask it and we'll see.
		Did you take trips to D.C. that were non-business during the time period that this case of this...
		The matter was under investigation.
		I'm going to object as the relevance relates to the matter that we're here before your honor.
		Well again, the question already asked is to take personal or business trips.
		But that was with Mr. Wade.
		That was with Mr. Wade.
		This I asked her alone whether she took.
		Okay.
	What's the relevance?
	And what would be the relevance of that?
	Trying to understand whether or not we have the ability to show a personal trip in which Mr. Wade is there at the same time.
	I understand her answer, okay?
	I understand her answer, but we have documents.
	We have records that...
	Your Honor, I'm going to go back to the documents.
	Well, this could be something that's maybe not part of the record yet, but I think there have been other things discussed in this case, and they have evidence that Mr. Wade may have been in D.C. at the same time.
	If you want to ask about that exact specific date, Mr. Sedan, you can do that.
	I would reference the court that that was not asked of Mr. Wade.
	Anything about any trips to D.C.?
	Sure.
	And so that's going to limit its merit and impact on credibility.
	So, you know, ask the question.
	I understand your testimony is you never took a trip to D.C. with Mr. Wade.
	That's correct.
	Personal or business?
	That's correct.
	Were you ever in D.C. at the same time as Mr. Wade?
	I was not.
	Personal or business?
	No, me and Mr. Wade have not been to D.C. at the same time.
	However, since Mr. Wade has been on this case, He's been to D.C. Since Mr. Wade has been on to this case, I've been to D.C. What has not happened is we have not been in the District of Columbia at the same time.
	Now, the only thing I'm not sure about with what you asked me is if I've been to D.C. personally, because I've got a lot of personal friends in that area, but I know that I have been to D.C. I did an interview at Howard University.
	I went to D.C. for that.
	Seems like I've been to D.C. one other time.
	Oh, I went to D.C. for the Global Summit.
	Yeah, those were two separate trips.
	My next question is based on her opening the door, and therefore I'll just ask it and Your Honor can decide whether or not it's appropriate.
	When you went to D.C., did you go to the White House?
	I did not go to the White House.
	Well, apparently I'm going to get the answer anyhow.
	There you have it.
	Next question.
	Okay.
	You indicated...
	You're a liar!
	Your relationship with Mr. Wade, the romantic relationship, ended...
	You left it in August of 2023.
	That sound right?
	That's the hard conversation.
	That's not the...
	We've covered this.
	Next question.
	And you characterized it as a tough conversation, correct?
	Yes.
	I'm not going to get into the conversation, per se.
	We should.
	Well, if he doesn't want to, we won't go there.
	So, Mr. Sedan, next question.
	You know, it's kind of hard to say no when you've got that opportunity.
	All I'm going to say is, was it pre-indictment in this case?
	We know the timeline, the indictment was delivered.
	And so they were clear, the physical relationship ended.
	Pre-indictment.
	And is that when you were talking about the tough conversation?
	I'm not sure that the tough conversation didn't happen until after, but the physical relationship, so I'm sure if you ask Mr. Wade, because he's a male, he would say we ended June or July, because physical contact ended then.
	Just in my mind, being a woman, it's over when you have that hard conversation.
	I just think women and men think differently.
	And I think the answer, Mr. Stato, to your question was she's not sure whether it was before or after the indictment.
	I'm not sure that that was her answer, but let's see if I can get specific.
	That is what I said.
	That's what I said.
	I'll let you...
	Next question, Mr. Stato.
	Want to say one more?
	The romantic relationship ended before the indictment was returned, yes or no?
	To a man, yes.
	To a man, yes.
	Do you know?
	She's explained this.
	She's explained this.
	And did the forthcoming indictment have anything to do with that?
	Or was it just a coincidence?
	Let's go on and have a conversation.
	I'm just asking you whether or not it was a coincidence.
	It had absolutely nothing to do with this.
	It's interesting that we're here about this money.
	Mr. Wade is used to women that, as he told me one time, the only thing a woman can do for him is make him a sandwich.
	We would have brutal arguments about the fact that I am your equal.
	I don't need anything from a man.
	A man is not a plan.
	A man is a companion.
	And so there was tension.
	Always in our relationship, which is why I would give him his money back.
	I don't need anybody to foot my bills.
	The only man who's ever foot my bills completely is my daddy.
	Is there anything else you would like to add to that?
	No.
	Sure.
	I'm sure we'll talk about it further.
	No, we're not going to talk about it further.
	All right.
	No back and forth.
	Let's stay down.
	Next question.
	My next question is something that has to do with the...
	What I've characterized as the church speech.
	Let me just tell you what the question is, because I know that's not something...
	Preserve it for the record.
	Huh?
	You can preserve the question for the record, but then we'll move on.
	That's correct.
	Thank you.
	When you gave what I've referred to as the Martin Luther King weekend church speech, you know what I'm referring to?
	A great honor of mine.
	That's a historic African American church.
	Yes, I do.
	Okay.
	Did you have handwritten notes with you?
	That you were reading from during the speech.
	And on second thought, Mr. Sado, because you might have a number of questions about this, why don't we just bullet point what you would want to cover on this to preserve for the record, and then we'll move on to the next topic.
	Okay.
	Since I had laid out before that the forensic misconduct isn't a subject of the entry.
	Do I not get an answer for that?
	That's right.
	Did you read your speech?
	No, Mr. Sado, for everything related to any forensic misconduct.
	Oh, you just want me to stay out of it now.
	We can do it in a bullet form if you just want to cover what you would have asked, but it's not in a question-and-answer format.
	Okay, so I should do that at this point or do it when you're ready?
	We can do it right now.
	I'm going to ask her about, did she prepare the speech?
	Did she have notes on the speech?
	Did she read the speech?
	When did she write the speech?
	Who was she referring to when she was talking about others?
	Who was she referring to when she said they?
	Who she was referring to when she spoke in terms of their...
	That is...
	I would love to answer those questions.
	Well, Ms. Wilson, you could certainly do that in some other format.
	But for today, that's what we decided we're not going to cover.
	Who was she talking about that was playing the race card and why she didn't tell the people at the church that she had had a personal slash romantic relationship with the...
	I'll do respect the way it was characterized.
	The black man that she was referring to and was the black man she refer referring to was that Mr. Wade.
	That's that area of inquiry.
	Noted for the record Mr. Sadow.
	Next topic.
	Okay.
	I realize that you've testified that you have no records that with regard to cash payments, correct?
	Would your bank records reflect that you withdrew cash from your bank accounts during the time period of 2020, 2021, 2022, or 2023?
	I'm not asking you, I'm just asking whether they would reflect that you withdrew cash from any of your bank accounts.
	So the exact amounts?
	Of course, I withdrew money throughout that time period, throughout my life.
	I've withdrawn money from the bank.
	Yes, of course.
	Talking about cash.
	That is, that you go to a bank or you go to an ATM and you take cash out.
	Either that way or you go to Publix and you overpay or you go to another store and you overpay.
	So yes, both through that, yes, of course they will reflect that at times.
	Okay.
	And so those records, if we had them, would show that, correct?
	That throughout the course of my life, I took out money.
	I was very specific.
	Yes, during the course of that time period, I would have taken money out, yes.
	So, do you have a problem with...
	Absolutely, yes.
	You don't want the bank records to be made available for the court and the court alone.
	I'm going to object as to the relevance, and this has already been addressed earlier as it relates to other records.
	This is an improper line of questioning he's doing it for the purpose of harassment.
	I'm just going to sustain it on relevance.
	Mr. Seda, if that's something you want to follow up privately, you can do that.
	Last area, briefly.
	Yes, sir.
	You had contact with Mr. Wade in the year 2020, correct?
	I had some contact with Mr. Wade.
	Would you explain when you say some contact?
	Please tell us.
	Talking about 2020.
	I had some contact with Mr. Wade in 2020.
	One of the reasons your allegations are so preposterous or mismerchants that you have joined is...
	Ma 'am, I didn't ask you about the allegations.
	I asked you about your contact.
	That's all I ask you, okay?
	I appreciate that you want to say something, but I'm interested in did you have contacts with Mr. Wade in 2020?
	And your answer so far has been yes, correct?
	Very limited contact because...
	Mr. Wade had a form of cancer that makes your allegations somewhat ridiculous.
	I do appreciate the characterization.
	I'm not going to emasculate a black man, but I'm just telling you.
	I'm sorry, what?
	I'm not going to emasculate a black man.
	Did you understand that?
	All right, let's get back on track.
	Mr. Seda, next question.
	Trying to, Your Honor.
	Would you tell us on the occasions in 2020 that you had...
	Contact with Mr. Wade.
	I'm sorry.
	I thought I had answered that.
	Yes, sir.
	There were times in 2020 I had contact, but 2020 was a year I was running for office.
	It was a year that he was going through some serious medical issues, and I did not have much contact, but I certainly had contact with him in 2020.
	Did you go out to eat with him?
	Maybe.
	Probably.
	Did you visit him in any location?
	His office?
	Or did he visit you in your office in 2020?
	I am sure he...
	I'm sure...
	That's a very good question.
	I'm sure he came to 750 in 2020.
	750 is...
	Was my office.
	Okay.
	Not often, but maybe once or twice.
	Maybe I went to his office once or twice, but...
	Maybe once.
	And the purpose for going to his office would have been what?
	Maybe we would have went to Mellow Mushrooms for pizza, or maybe he would have come for lunch.
	I'm sure we went by each other's office, though.
	But not often, not a lot.
	We're both grinding, trying to make a living.
	I understand what you've said about the cancer, and I'm not going into that.
	But when you were going out with him to restaurants, or when he would come to your office, right?
	Those were not sterile environments, were they?
	Oh, very sterile.
	The restaurants were sterile environments?
	A lot of times we wouldn't eat there.
	We would pick up something and go in, but they were...
	I'm listening to you.
	You pick up and take it to where?
	Maybe eat at our office, but it did not happen much.
	That's what I'm trying to explain to you.
	In my office in 2020, nobody was coming in.
	I was stir-crazy, so I would still go into my office.
	You remember...
	When I started this, I said, I am not even sure if we came to each other's offices, but I am trying to be overcautious.
	So I think I can recall him at 750 a couple of times.
	I just think I can recall him at 750 once, but let's say twice.
	I have seen his office.
	I remember all the awards in the lobby.
	But I'm not sure in 2020 I went.
	I'm not even sure I went in 2020 at all.
	I just want to tell you, yes, because I'm not sure.
	But I have a distinct recollection of him at 750.
	I actually don't have a distinct recollection of me at his office in 2020.
	But maybe I went to his office in 2020.
	Maybe.
	Did you have ongoing phone conversations during 2020 with Mr. Wade?
	Oh, yeah.
	I talked to him.
	Yes.
	Absolutely.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	No question about that.
	No question.
	I talked to him on the phone in 2020.
	I understood, and this is, maybe I was confused, the Belize trip was for his 50th birthday and that was in March.
	He turned 50 March 18th of 2023.
	If you look at the dates of the trip, I think we were there about six days.
	We stayed at two different locations.
	And you paid for it?
	100%.
	He said, not only, I mean, I paid for the hotel, I paid for the flights, I had a birthday luncheon for him, I paid for massages, I paid for everything.
	And would those payments be reflected on your credit card?
	I paid for the cash.
	You paid them in cash?
	Cabs.
	I was telling you all the different things.
	And I'm asking you whether or not those payments would be reflected on credit card bills of yours.
	So there was about $500 that I think is reflected on a debit card.
	My recollection is I took about four in cash with me.
	$400 or $4,000?
	$4,000.
	But I remember I handed him $2,500, and then the rest was just the money we spent.
	I probably gave $300 or $400 to this guy who was a taxi driver.
	He would drive us every day around the two or three days we went.
	Took him to eat like it was my trip money.
	And you had, to be clear to end this up, the $4,000 that you've just told us.
	But I didn't give it all to him, remember.
	I only gave the $2,500 to him.
	I didn't ask you that.
	I was going to ask you that.
	$4,000 is part of your, my words, cash hoard that you had collected over time.
	Cash what?
	Hoard, H-O-R-D-E.
	Oh, I thought you said something different, sir.
	No, I'm afraid I wouldn't say that.
	Any circumstances to you or in court.
	All right, back on track.
	The horde.
	Cash or debt.
	I would not classify it in that way, but I have money at my house.
	Yes, sir.
	And the money, when you had money at your house?
	When I, and look, I'm speaking too loosely.
	I had money wherever I was staying.
	So I was not referring to my house in 750.
	I'm saying I had money.
	Wherever I was laying my head, yes, sir.
	That was my fault that I wasn't clear.
	So when you were at what we said the Yerty condo during the time period we've always discussed, that's where you would keep your cash?
	When I say there, yes.
	That's all I have.
	Thank you.
	All right.
	I want to see if we can get through a few more defense counsel possible before breaking for today.
	Mr. Stockton.
	Madam District Attorney, I'm Alan Stocks, and I don't think we've had the pleasure of meeting.
	It's a pleasure to meet you, sir.
	Madam DA, you described these various trips, and Mr. Sadow asked you about going to Washington.
	Did you and Mr. Wade go to New York?
	I've gone to New York.
	I've gone to New York twice since I've been District Attorney.
	I'm trying to think if it's two or three times.
	I went to do a domestic violence thing there, for sure.
	And I was honored and I went to the Apollo there.
	Those are the only two trips that come to mind.
	I went.
	He was not with me.
	You also said that he was a world traveler and been on many of the continents.
	He's been to six.
	Have you been on any of those continents with him?
	Besides this one.
	Where's Belize?
	What continent is it?
	I'm not being funny.
	I don't know.
	I've been to Belize with him.
	I've been to the Bahamas with him.
	I've been with Aruba with him.
	Don't embarrass me.
	I'm not sure what continents those are on.
	Whatever continents those are, that's where I've been.
	I'm sure if I gave it some thought, I would tell you.
	But whatever continents those are, I've been to those locations.
	But not Australia or any other continents.
	I don't even want to go to Australia.
	I do know he took a trip in December to Australia.
	I have no idea.
	I don't know anything about that trip.
	When Mr. Wade began working with your office, he had two other gentlemen that worked in his firm with him.
	Is that correct?
	Yes.
	Terrence Bradley worked for him, and Chris Campbell worked not for him.
	They worked with each other.
	Did you understand what their partnership arrangement was?
	No.
	Did he ever make you aware of how fees were divided or anything?
	No.
	Now, since you have been district attorney, the two gentlemen that worked with Mr. Wade and his firm, they also had contracts with your office.
	Is that correct?
	I probably had two.
	I don't know if we've covered this in Willis, but I still don't know what the relevance would be of her testimony to this.
	But I've had about 10 people.
	I'm sorry.
	Do you want me to answer or no?
	Let's figure this out.
	Judge, respectfully, I think based on Mr. Wade's testimony, he had an interest in those contracts.
	Sure.
	And then, but how has that been imputed to Ms. Willis?
	I don't know whether or not she knew she was giving him that benefit.
	That's what I was trying to explore.
	Okay.
	Well, maybe we can start with that question, and then if she doesn't know about it, then the ins and outs of all the contracts wouldn't be quite as relevant.
	It goes to lay a foundation for that, though.
	Go ahead.
	The two gentlemen that were in Mr. Wade's office, Did they have what I think has been referred to as a taint contract?
	So let me be clear, and I may get the names wrong.
	When I first became DA, the office was not properly staffed.
	And so I did, I'm surprised any lawyer would take it.
	But I did a contract for like $60 an hour to help us out with first appearance.
	That lasted a few months, okay?
	So I can't remember if Bradley or Campbell had that.
	I'm sure we can have records and I can tell you which one, but I just can't remember now.
	I like their experience.
	Bradley had been a probation officer and a defense attorney.
	Campbell had been a police officer and a defense attorney.
	There's a reason I'm telling you this.
	Then that contract, like I said, it didn't last long.
	It was just I was aggressively hiring, hiring, hiring, hiring.
	As soon as I got where I felt like I had first appearance.
	Enough lawyers for that?
	I let them go.
	Then we had what's called a filter contract, but it was not filter for this particular case.
	I do have a lawyer who does the filter for this election interference case.
	When we're talking about filter the contract they had that neither one of them has any longer, I now have another lawyer that does that for me.
	Only for police brutality cases.
	It's for what I call the...
	So when I first got to be the DA...
	I had, the whole unit was called anti-corruption.
	It dealt with both elections and police brutality cases.
	I actually took a trip to Houston and visited the district attorney in Houston.
	They divided their work up, and I thought the way she was doing it was better than me.
	And so I made a civil rights unit.
	And so they did what we would classify as civil rights cases.
	Those are specifically the police brutality cases.
	When I first took over, I was told Paul had not filtered five cases.
	That was a joke.
	It ended up being the 101 cases.
	They weren't filtered, which is why I hired two of them.
	Eventually we got it down enough that it was one of them.
	And then now I still have one lawyer that does it, but now I've been able to cut those cases down to like 30. Can you tell me, help me understand what the purpose of the filter is?
	Yes, sir.
	So what a filter is, is police officers make statements in the line of duty, and you are not allowed as the prosecutor to know what those statements are if they're done in the furtherance of their employment.
	And in fact, if you know what those statements are, you're basically disqualified from the case.
	You can't have it anymore.
	So what our policy is, I think I pay them like a $50 flat fee.
	They pick the case up directly from the GBI because that's...
	That's where those cases go to.
	And then what they are to do is to go through the entire file.
	So the body cam, which is important because sometimes they'll make a statement to their supervisor on body cam in the police reports where they write things.
	It would be easy if it was just some statement of the police officer.
	But what you find out is these statements are embedded in it.
	And so what your filter lawyer does is they go through it.
	They either redact it out electronically.
	They cross it out, and then once it is crossed out, then they provide it to my team, and then we're able to look at it.
	That was not being done appropriately when I became district attorney.
	I thought that it had only been, so Mr. Howard had some Chinese wall thing that I didn't think worked at all, where allegedly those cases were properly redacted.
	That ended up being a joke.
	And so the five cases really turned into, I'm not going to say all 101, but a vast majority.
	That is the work that Mr. Bradley and Mr. Campbell did for me.
	They did a really good job.
	All of those cases that we originally came with, they're done.
	They're not just done for Mr. Bradley and Mr. Campbell.
	They're done through my office.
	But obviously, life is not stagnant.
	There have been new police cases.
	I do have a lawyer that is doing that work now.
	That doesn't work for me.
	That's the same kind of deal.
	I have another lawyer that does filtering for this case, completely separate.
	So, in the same private office, you had a...
	filter contract then you had somebody else having handling first appearances and so forth and then you had a special prosecutor is that correct?
	I'm just not Ultimately, the answer to your question is yes, but I'm not sure that they did it at the same time.
	The first appearance contract was either $60 or $90.
	I don't know really how I convinced them to be able to take that, but I think because it was for such a short amount of time.
	And then I think I pay my filter lawyers, which I still don't know how I get away with, about $150 an hour.
	And I want you to understand the AG.
	Pay special prosecutors $1,000 an hour.
	So I'm a tough negotiator.
	Paul was paying people up to $375 an hour.
	I won't pay anyone more than $250 is my max.
	I have a lot of lawyers that, a lot for what I have, that work at $250, and I cap them every month.
	You can't go past a certain amount of hours.
	Would you agree that if Mr. Wade and the two other gentlemen that were in his firm We're splitting fees in equal thirds.
	Would you agree that he would benefit from the tank contract and also from the other first appearance contract?
	I would agree he would make money.
	Yes, so to make money is a benefit.
	There's a thought, guys.
	Mr. Jerem, if you're still with us on Zoom.
	No questions, Jerem.
	Mr. McDougald.
	I do have a couple here, but it's a little awkward from back here.
	Yeah, why don't you go ahead and make your way up.
	Good afternoon, Ms. Wells.
	How are you doing?
	I'm very well.
	How are you, Mr. McDougall?
	I think this is our first in-person meeting, correct?
	Second.
	Second.
	Well, I apologize for not remembering you more clear.
	That's quite all right.
	I'm referring now to exhibit number 21. Yes, sir.
	Which was your financial disclosure form for 2022.
	Yes, sir.
	And it has a question.
	Which requires you to disclose any gifts or favors from a single prohibited source in the aggregate amount of $100 or more.
	Do you see that?
	I don't, but I believe you.
	It would be on page two in the middle, paragraph number three.
	Yes.
	What is your understanding of a prohibited source for purposes of this form?
	I believe there's some classification of somebody you, like, don't have a personal relationship with that gives you $100.
	All right, if you look under there, it's paragraph 2, romanette 2. It defines it as someone that you know or should know is seeking to do or is doing business with the county.
	That includes Mr. Wade as of the date you filled out this form, correct?
	Yes, but he never gave me a gift of $100 or more.
	The only thing that I would say maybe went over that, but I don't think it ever did, is if we went to dinner and my meal was $100, but I don't think I've ever eaten $100 worth of food at a restaurant because I would not pay him back if we went to lunch or went to dinner.
	But trips I paid him back for, you know, I never thought about the money until y 'all brought it up.
	And I would be less than honest.
	It says I was giving him the money back because I was the district attorney.
	I didn't take gifts from him for a lot of personal reasons.
	Anyway, I did not take gifts from him.
	And so your reason for not disclosing.
	Any gifts from Mr. Wade on exhibit number 21 is that the aggregate amount on a net basis was less than $100 in the year 2022.
	Is that correct?
	I did not accept a gift of him of more than $100 in 2022.
	The one exception to that, because I want us to be clear, is we probably went out to eat.
	Multiple times in the year, if you're considering eating a meal, you know, because we went out multiple times, that probably went to the level of more than $100.
	But if we're doing tit for tat like that, I probably paid for as many meals as he paid for.
	And so I did not receive any gifts from him.
	The question on the form.
	I understand the question.
	...in excess of $100, and your testimony is that you did not receive in the aggregate more than $100.
	All right, Mr. McDule, you can sit down now.
	I don't believe she answered that question, Your Honor.
	She answered as to specific individual gifts.
	And you're not listening to my answer either, so we're done.
	Very well.
	Okay.
	Mr. Rice.
	Mr. Gillen.
	Good afternoon.
	Good afternoon, sir.
	A few questions here.
	You saw the book here, Find Me the Vote.
	That was shown to you, correct?
	Yes, sir.
	I would like to just tender this as an exhibit, number 22. Is that your copy?
	It is.
	All right.
	What exhibit is that going to be?
	22. All right.
	I'm making the evidentiary contribution here to this.
	Well, I guess you're tendering it.
	Is it with the position of the state?
	There's no relevance to this point.
	Mr. Gilliland, are you using this to confront her with prior statements?
	Yes, Your Honor.
	And statements that she made concerning her financial situation and laying the foundation for that and that she gave these interviews.
	I don't think it needs to be admitted as an actual evidence for the record for you to do what you need to do with it.
	Ms. Mark, this is number 22, and we'll move from there.
	Thank you, Your Honor.
	Now, you were asked a little bit about this book before, correct?
	I think Mrs. Merchant asked me some questions, yes.
	And you gave about, what, about six interviews to the authors of this book in a sit-down?
	No, sir.
	You didn't?
	She answered how many interviews she gave in her opinion.
	How many, in your opinion, do you believe you gave, and how long did they last?
	Two to three.
	Maybe 20, 30 minutes.
	So your testimony is at most, you think that you gave maybe an hour to an hour and a half's interview to the authors of this book?
	Oh, you mean in total?
	In total, yeah.
	Maybe, yeah.
	Anywhere between, definitely not more than two-ish hours.
	Okay.
	But you also were telling when they were the title of the book, of course, is a hard charging Georgia prosecutor, a rogue president and the plot to steal American election.
	You've seen that relevant.
	What was the title of the book relevant?
	I'm going to ask her whether or not that was the theme that they gave her when they talked with her.
	What do you mean by that?
	Well, because they sat down and they told her why they were there to interview her.
	And why does that matter?
	Well, I think it matters because it shows they want her to give her version of what...
	Her life story.
	This is almost a life story of her.
	So that's why it's relevant.
	But if the court thinks it's not, then...
	No, no.
	It could be relevant to your issue of the forensic misconduct that has been alleged and maybe some of the motives at play when it comes to forensic misconduct.
	But I'm not seeing, again, what we're here for today was the relationship and or any financial elements of it.
	Correct.
	Well, I think it's clearly relevant to the forensic misconduct.
	Also relevant to personal interest in terms of the finances.
	I didn't make 10 cents off that book.
	Pardon me?
	I didn't make 10 cents off that book.
	Didn't ask whether you made any money.
	Okay.
	Didn't ask whether you made any money.
	Do you have any other statements that you hadn't already been confronted with by Ms. Merchant?
	Well, other than I want to focus on when you were telling them about your financial straits and you were living kind of month to month, that is what your financial status was back in...
	We covered that at length.
	You're at the end of the line.
	I'm sorry about that, but we've got to find new ground.
	Well, let me move on to my point here.
	So the point is that what you're telling us is that you were in financial straits, but really that your testimony today is you had a cash hoard of maybe up to ten thousand dollars in cash where you laid your head at night.
	So that you would dip out and there would be no record of it, correct?
	That's not what I'm telling you, sir.
	That's not at all what I'm telling you.
	What I'm telling you is that throughout the course of my life, I have always kept cash in my house.
	That cash has ranged from times, you know, my father would probably be ashamed of this because he would say it should be more, but that cash at times has ranged from $500 to...
	Maybe $9,000.
	And he would be like, that is not what I told you to do.
	I've always had that amount of money.
	What I've told you is that when I travel, you do better negotiating when you travel.
	If you have cash, you go get the cab.
	They say, oh, we're going to charge you $300 for the day.
	Well, I got American cash.
	Will you take it for $150?
	And so it's my practice to take money when I travel.
	We're not talking about a whole lot of money.
	We're going to the Bahamas.
	$1,500 in cash is in my pocket or at the most $2,500.
	Belize was actually probably the most money I've ever taken.
	And it was taken because it was a big deal.
	My 50th birthday sucked.
	His 50th birthday, it sucked.
	It was terrible.
	Your Honor, I'd like to get back to some questions here.
	I'm trying to answer it.
	So let's move to the specific yes or no here.
	Have you told us today that you would keep a cash forward in your residence up to about $9,000?
	Yes or no?
	And throughout the course of my...
	And so let's even be more specific than that.
	Probably from the time...
	Your Honor, I'm only asking for yes or no.
	And we have already covered this.
	I know you're laying the foundation, but it's already been laid.
	The filibuster is here.
	I'm trying to move through the filibuster.
	But we're not talking about a lot of...
	And so it could be...
	$2,000.
	It could be $1,500.
	It could be $7,500.
	It just depends on what you're doing at that time.
	What I'm telling you is when I traveled, I took cash.
	I find that when you travel, especially to foreign countries, the American dollar does well, and it's good to have cash.
	You can negotiate with the taxi driver, with the jet skis, and it's not a lot of money we're talking about.
	Okay, I understand, Ms. Wells.
	Let's get to a question, Mr. Goodman.
	You have cash in your house, but you had a tax lien on your property.
	Is that right?
	I don't believe I had a tax lien on my property.
	You didn't have a tax lien on your property.
	You got to talk a little louder, Mr. Hunt.
	Okay.
	We already covered that, Mr. Gillen?
	I need new ground here.
	I'm asking the question.
	I'm trying to figure out how someone can have a tax lien.
	You can ask that question.
	But not...
	Use the money that they allegedly said they have.
	Well, I think Ms. Merchant asked that exact same question.
	She said she didn't use the money to pay your tax lien.
	So what's your question that's new?
	So I was going to build on that to say...
	No more billing.
	It's already billed.
	All right.
	It's the same way you pay a bill.
	So just put the top on it if you need to, okay?
	It's the same way you owe a bill and go shopping.
	Well, now, you know, have you ever used...
	Did you say earlier that you used Cash App?
	When I would pay Robin Bryant, I used Cash App.
	What is Cash App for the record?
	I don't need to know that for the record.
	Let's keep going.
	Well, so if you're paying Robin with Cash App, why aren't you paying, allegedly paying Mr...
	There's no alleged here.
	Why aren't you paying, allegedly, Mr. Wade with Cash App?
	I don't think Mr. Wade does Cash App.
	Did you ask him?
	I think he's told me he doesn't do Cash App.
	Okay, so that's the reason why you didn't use Cash App.
	He's sitting next to me.
	I hand him the money.
	Because there would be a record in Cash App of your making payments, correct?
	Yes, but I didn't think that I was making a record in a personal relationship.
	Because when you're filing your, and I know that I'm going to move into this financial statement here, you were asked just a second ago about your non-disclosure form or your, excuse me, your disclosure form of an Exhibit 21 where we agree that Mr. Wade is a prohibited source, correct?
	What I agree to is I don't believe he's giving me gifts.
	You would like to classify these trips as gifts, but I've always paid my fair share on these trips, so I did not look at them as gifts.
	I don't think that what this is disclosing, and they can tell me if they mean something different, I don't think it means that if you go to dinner with somebody over the course of a year and it gets to 100, you're supposed to report it.
	If my understanding of that is wrong, I've probably been to lunches with a couple of people that over the course of a year, they paid, I paid.
	Prohibited source means...
	We already went over this, Mr. Gillen.
	Mr. McDougald.
	Well, Your Honor, I have to lay the foundation here before I can follow up with my next question.
	I don't know why you have to.
	It's all the questions that have been made.
	Then, your...
	The 2022 disclosure form did not list any of the thousands and thousands of dollars that Mr. Wade paid for on trips that you were on.
	Isn't that correct?
	That's because Mr. Wade was paid that money back or he was paid due to the fact that I bought the plane ticket or I paid for the hotel.
	There was never money that he gave me.
	That wasn't the nature of our relationship.
	You know, there's so many men, and Mr. Wade is one of them, where the nature of the relationship is they're just paying a woman.
	The nature of our relationship is companionship and friendship.
	Despite the way people would like to paint certain women, it's just not true.
	Final question.
	And not a single solitary documentary piece of values showing that you have withdrawn the cash to pay back.
	That's not accurate.
	Thank you.
	Okay.
	Mr. McCullough, on behalf of Mr. Floyd.
	All right.
	Mr. Cromwell, on behalf of Ms. Latham.
	The great thing about becoming last is most of your questions.
	I have one question, Ms. Lewis.
	Can you hear me?
	Yes, sir.
	In the time period between February 2021 and January of 2022, while you were staying at the Yerdi Convent, did your father ever come and visit you during that time period at the Yerdi Convent?
	He did not.
	All right.
	Ms. Cross, I would imagine you have a number of topics to cover with Ms. Willis that'll take more than 10 to 15 minutes?
	I do.
	Okay.
	And I think we've reached a stopping point for today.
	And so, Ms. Willis, I'd ask you to step down now.
	And I'd also remind you that you're not to discuss your testimony or that of any other.
	And we'll be back here again at 9 a.m.
	We'll do 9 a.m. this time tomorrow.
	Before we recess for today, I want to check in on logistics, and I'll ask Ms. Merchant, once the testimony of Ms. Willis has concluded, any other witnesses do you anticipate calling?
	And then space objectives We can handle that now.
	Ms. Wilson, you can step down.
	You want me to leave the courtroom?
	Or you can sit at the council table.
	We don't need you in the witness box.
	All right, so two witnesses and then querying other defense counsel.
	I know, Mr. Gillen, there was a potential witness that was objected to by the state, so there's another one there.
	And we can talk about that.
	Were there any other witnesses anticipated from any defense counsel?
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Oh, man.
unidentified		No show of hands.
		And then Ms. Cross, any witnesses on your behalf?
		I expect so, Your Honor, and I expect that to take 45 hours.
		Okay.
		And how many witnesses would you imagine?
		Without committing myself to a final number, my best guess at this point would be three to four.
		Okay.
		All right.
		We know who I mean, I gave them our witnesses.
		I know we're supposed to give witnesses for an evidentiary hearing for guessing the one is John Floyd, but I don't know who it is.
		All right.
		No, I understand, Ms. Merchant.
		However, I don't think at this point there's any statutory requirement.
		We have the standing order for expert witnesses.
		And if SAIT doesn't want to extend that courtesy, then I think you're stuck with it.
		All right.
		I'm certainly happy to represent that Mr. Floyd will be a witness.
		The other witnesses will be impeaching of this year.
		Okay.
		All right.
		Let's take up these last couple issues here before we break then.
		The issue of the Delta Airlines records.
		The motion to quash was filed by the state on behalf of Mr. Willis, I believe.
		I did file a motion, Your Honor.
		Oh, excuse me.
		My representation was that I had just gotten notice of them, I think it was yesterday.
		Okay.
		And so now that I've had the review of them, I object to the general fishing expeditions.
		I've introduced a new record today that was from Delta.
		To my knowledge that there's going to be no further new production in the Delta records.
		I don't want to burden the court with anything if the court wants to take a look at it and see if there's anything.
		Different than that.
		I don't have an objection.
		I don't like the idea that we're just looking for anything.
		I don't want to put an obligation on the court, but I'm happy to agree to any camera.
		And so, Ms. Murchin, I take it.
		All right.
		So, Ms. Murchin, I take it the purpose of the subpoena.
		I'm going to need you to step out.
		Step up, ma'am.
		Right.
		Is it because you suspect there are other travel records, or just you think there might be something else in there?
		Well, one is to prove some of the travel records that they traveled together.
		And so we have no problems, like I told the state.
		I mean, what I'm saying is that we've heard about the trips today in detail.
		Is there anything else that's in these records that you're saying is going to prove some additional trip, or is it just further corroborating what really is kind of uncontested at this point?
		There may be some additional trip.
		But you don't know of any specifically.
		You just think there might be any.
		Okay.
		All right.
		Well, then let's continue with that.
		Then if you want to send them or instruct Delta to send them to us in Chambers, we'll take a look.
		And I think essentially if there's...
		You can tell us, Ms. Merchant, what you think we should be looking for and what you think is relevant, and we'll do that.
		Okay.
		All right.
		And then when it comes to Mr. Schaefer's witness, there was an issue raised about this kind of being a summary versus an expert witness, and so I reviewed the motions, and I think there was the, essentially kind of the summary document that Mr. Gillen's witness would, the sole purpose of this witness to introduce.
		Was there something about, I don't know whether it's from Mr. Abadi or Ms. Cross, was there something about this attachment substantively that you think is inaccurate or is it literally just a summary document?
		I can't tell because the documents to support it were on a thumb drive and there's tens of thousands of those documents.
		So I just, I don't know whether that is accurate or not.
		I can point to some characterizations on it that I would quibble with.
		Sure.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Hey guys.
unidentified		I think the result is wrong, but I just can't agree to.
		The documents or someone testifying from the documents that I just can't verify.
		It may well be that there isn't anything ultimately, but I can't represent that and I can't agree.
		The document itself isn't authored or identified as being authored by any particular person.
		Okay give me a second while I pull it back up.
		So what I was provided by Mr. Gillen is a three-page document that starts with a timeline, dates, events, and sources, and it ends with an Excel sheet with some more figures.
		And Mr. Gillen, what do you have to say on this?
		We would intend to call Bill Salensky as a summary witness, not expert.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		And what we've done is we've done All right, ladies and gentlemen.
		Okay, here we go.
		Here we go.
		This is now hour six and a half.
		This unbelievable trial.
		I don't even know where to begin.
		There's just too much content.
		We're going to have to cover it all in our show.
		We're going to be live on our Tenet show, Tenet Media.
		We're going to be live with expert witness and legal scholar Tom Fitton from Judicial Watch.
		Ladies and gentlemen, check that out at 545 over on Tenant Media's channel.
		We will share all the links on our social media.
		We are going to have to get all of these clips for the morning show.
		We will be live tomorrow morning.
		Link is in the description.
		ALX is telling us we will be live tomorrow morning.
		Too many clips to cover.
		Too much to go over.
		The world has burned to the ground.
		Okay?
		The world has burned to the ground.
		Fannie Willis, complete and total meltdown.
		I gotta get, like, just one or two Fannie Willis clips, okay?
		Here we go.
		Fannie Willis literally having an unhinged meltdown on camera.
		Watch.
unidentified		Did he come to, I guess, the condo?
		I'm not sure what you call the condo apartment.
		Would he come and stay at that condo or visit you there?
		I'm sorry, visit you there.
		What condo?
		What apartment?
		I want to be clear.
		So, not your house.
		I know you classified one as house and one as condo, so I'm trying to use those terms.
		See, what you don't understand is because of this case, I've got to move.
		And so I...
		If you could ask a more precise question.
		Yes, please.
		Give me the time period.
		Mr. Wade visits you at the place you laid your head.
		When?
		Has he ever visited you at the place you laid your head?
		So let's be clear, because you've lied in this.
		Let me tell you which one you lied in.
		Right here?
		I think you lied right here.
		No, no, no, no.
		This is the truth, Judge.
		It is a lie.
		It is a lie.
		Mr. Sano, thank you.
		We're going to take five minutes.
		We'll be back in five.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		I've never seen anything like it.
		I've never seen anything like it.
		Fanny Willis just had, like, there's the composure element, and then there's the actual disbarment element.
		Fanny Willis has been presented.
		This is the most important clip, okay?
		It's the most important clip, and then you've got to tune in.
		You've got to tune in tomorrow.
		Because we're already, like, actively, we're not going to sleep tonight.
		We've been live for seven hours.
		We're not going to sleep tonight.
		We love you.
		We thank you for watching.
		We will be there for you.
		Thank you for being there for us.
		Fannie Willis literally proving that she needs to be disbarred from this.
		This is the most important clip.
		This is the most important clip.
		If you see, after seven hours of testimony, this is the clip.
		Fannie Willis is supposed to be a judicious, non-bias prosecutor, and she let her mask slip.
		She let a lot of things slip over the last couple of months and years, if you know what I mean.
		But ladies and gentlemen, this is the one.
		Fannie Willis, in a psychotic breakdown, screamed out her Trump derangement syndrome, screamed out from under her, and she's going to be thrown from this case.
		There is no way you can present yourself as an unbiased prosecutor when you say this about Donald Trump.
		Go.
unidentified		So your office objected to us getting Delta records for flights that you may have taken when we started.
		Well, no, no, no.
		I object to you getting records.
		You've been intrusive into people's personal lives.
		You're confused.
		You think I'm on trial.
		These people are on trial for trying to steal an election in 2020.
		I'm not on trial, no matter how hard you try to put me on trial.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		Can't do that.
		Can't do that.
		Oh man, but you are on trial, Big Fanny.
		You are.
		And you're on trial because you were big grinding with Nathan's hot dog in his hot dog roller.
		Ladies and gentlemen, Fanny Willis asked to describe her relationship with Nathan Wade.
		Lover boy says, we both grinding.
		Go.
unidentified		Did you go out to eat with him?
		Maybe.
		Probably.
		Did you?
		Did you visit him in any location, his office, or did he visit you in your office in 2020?
		I am sure he...
		I'm sure...
		That's a very good question.
		I'm sure he came to 750 in 2020.
		750 is...
		Was my office.
		Okay.
		Not often, but maybe once or twice.
		Maybe I went to his office once or twice, but maybe once.
		And the purpose for going to his office would have been what?
		Maybe we would have went to Mellow Mushrooms for pizza, or maybe he would have come for lunch.
		I'm sure we went by each other's office, though.
		But not often, not a lot.
		We both grinding, trying to make a living.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		We both grinding!
		Okay, listen, we read the comments.
		I know people didn't want me to talk.
		It was everything I could do to hold my tongue while this was going on.
		But I don't have to hold my tongue during my show tomorrow, ladies and gentlemen.
		The Benny Brigade will be there for you.
		We were the number one independent streamer in the entire nation during this.
		And we thank you.
		We thank you.
		The Brigade is here.
		We march toward truth.
		Join the Brigade if you wish.
		Go to BennyJohnson.com.
		You'll see the Brigade right there.
		And you can join.
		You can support us and our independent journalism, the incredible team that was here today, all day.
		We've been live for every second that we've been in the studio today.
		And we love you, we care about you, and we want you to be able to see this and to laugh, to put up memes.
		And you know what?
		ALX, like, are we going to be live at 9 a.m.?
		Probably tomorrow.
		I mean, if Big Fanny's sitting back in that seat, sitting back on the bench, and she's going to be riding that wood, then ALX is going to say, ALX is saying, LOL, maybe it's...
		Maybe we're going to do it tomorrow.
		Ladies and gentlemen, we may be back.
		If we have confirmation that Fannie Willis is going to be sitting up in that seat, we're going to be live again tomorrow.
		And more importantly, we're going to put all your comments on screen.
		We're going to just put all the comments on screen tomorrow, and you'll be able to be part of it with us.
		I don't want to talk over everyone.
		I want you to be able to speak.
		We are a movement together.
		Join the betting brigade if you wish to support us, ladies and gentlemen.
		Check out our brand new store.
		Totally and completely based.
		Ladies and gentlemen at the Bedding Brigade, you can submit your questions for us and for our guests.
		The verse of the day.
		We have never ended a broadcast without a verse of the day, and we will not stop today, even though we are going on seven hours live.
		Do not be afraid of sudden terror or the ruin of the wicked.
		When it comes, for the Lord will be your confidence and will keep your foot from being caught.
		Great.
		First, Rolls-Royce.
		Rolls-Royce picks the verse of the day.
		Proverbs 3, 25. When the wicked's ruin comes, it will be sudden and it will be terrifying.
		And we are witnessing that with Fanny Willis.
		Big Fanny Willis going down, baby.
		Join us on Tenet's channel if you want to see us continue our coverage with the great Tom Fitton.
		Ladies and gentlemen, I am Benny.
		I am marching beside you.
		We are fighting together.
		The brigade marches on.
		You cannot defeat an army of happy warriors.
		Stay based.
		This is your boy.
		It's the Benny Show.

▲