GA Case

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How and why would they have phone records? On what legal authority would they be able to request it? There are no criminal charges against Willis. Don't you need a warrant from a judge? And doesn't "warrant" actually have some criminal charges associated with it?

What? A warrant? Why would they need such a thing? Silly you.
The government was able to get all kinds of records from banks and phone companies with simple requests when it came to Jan. 6.

But...............In this case, they had a subpoena.....

"Friday’s court filing includes an affidavit from Charles Mittelstadt, a longtime investigator for defense attorneys. He said he obtained the cellphone data from AT&T through a subpoena."
https://www.ajc.com/politics/breaking-cellphone-data-raise-questions-about-start-of-willis-wade-relationship/SFVMYPTD2RD3HMZYOH3377CNNE/

How did he get a subpoena?

From a clerk, a judge, or other court officer.

Private investigators cannot get phone records because they cannot get subpoenas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Breaking: Rep. Jordan of the Judiciary Committee spoke to several 'whistleblowers' from Fani Willis' Office.

You're talking about Gym Jordan??? Soapy Gym?? Ha ha ha ha ha.

I know right...wonder if these whistleblowers are any better than the one who got arrested for lying to the FBI about Hunter Biden.

[Anonymous]

Ha! Trump’s lawyers have “corrected” their affidavit asking to enter more evidence.
Turns out there aren’t 11,000 texts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ha! Trump’s lawyers have “corrected” their affidavit asking to enter more evidence.
Turns out there aren’t 11,000 texts.

There are 13,000.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How and why would they have phone records? On what legal authority would they be able to request it? There are no criminal charges against Willis. Don't you need a warrant from a judge? And doesn't "warrant" actually have some criminal charges associated with it?

What? A warrant? Why would they need such a thing? Silly you.
The government was able to get all kinds of records from banks and phone companies with simple requests when it came to Jan. 6.

But...............In this case, they had a subpoena.....

"Friday’s court filing includes an affidavit from Charles Mittelstadt, a longtime investigator for defense attorneys. He said he obtained the cellphone data from AT&T through a subpoena."
https://www.ajc.com/politics/breaking-cellphone-data-raise-questions-about-start-of-willis-wade-relationship/SFVMYPTD2RD3HMZYOH3377CNNE/

How did he get a subpoena?

From a clerk, a judge, or other court officer.

Private investigators cannot get phone records because they cannot get subpoenas.

The article didn't say HE got the subpoena. It said he obtained it "through" a subpoena.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ha! Trump’s lawyers have “corrected” their affidavit asking to enter more evidence.
Turns out there aren’t 11,000 texts.

There are 13,000.

No, they corrected it from "12,000 text and calls" to "12,000 interactions" which may include the texts, calls, chat messages, emails, notifications, pings etc. By filing a corrected affidavit, it is not 12000 texts and calls but instead many fewer texts and calls.

[Anonymous]

About 11,000 were probably spam asking for campaign donations

You are all so desperate for it to actually mean something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:About 11,000 were probably spam asking for campaign donations

You are all so desperate for it to actually mean something.

Texts, robo calls, emails asking for campaign donations...

[Anonymous]

In one instance, in September of 2021, before Wade was hired for the case, the investigator claims in the affidavit that Wade went to Willis' address in the middle of the night.

Specifically, the investigator claims in his affidavit that records show Wade's phone arrived in the area of Willis's apartment at 10:45 pm in September 2021, and remained there until approximately 3:30 in the morning. The investigator claimed the records show Wade's phone arrived back to the area of his apartment just after 4:05 a.m., and that Wade "sent a text at 4:20am to Ms. Willis."

The filing from Trump's attorney says Mittlestadt is "available to testify at the Court's convenience."

https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-submits-cell-phone-records-allegedly-showing-nathan/story?id=107488801

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

They stated on the stand that they had a sexual relationship. Not apparently a very good one and it didn't last. They broke up. So the convoluted theory that she hired him so that he could spend her office's money on her doesn't work anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They stated on the stand that they had a sexual relationship. Not apparently a very good one and it didn't last. They broke up. So the convoluted theory that she hired him so that he could spend her office's money on her doesn't work anymore.

LOL. Not a very critical thinker, huh?
They went on 5 trips together. And, who knows if they are still seeing each other. Can we trust what either say if they lied about when their affair started?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They stated on the stand that they had a sexual relationship. Not apparently a very good one and it didn't last. They broke up. So the convoluted theory that she hired him so that he could spend her office's money on her doesn't work anymore.

LOL. Not a very critical thinker, huh?
They went on 5 trips together. And, who knows if they are still seeing each other. Can we trust what either say if they lied about when their affair started?

People are allowed to travel together. That’s not a crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They stated on the stand that they had a sexual relationship. Not apparently a very good one and it didn't last. They broke up. So the convoluted theory that she hired him so that he could spend her office's money on her doesn't work anymore.

LOL. Not a very critical thinker, huh?
They went on 5 trips together. And, who knows if they are still seeing each other. Can we trust what either say if they lied about when their affair started?

People are allowed to travel together. That’s not a crime.

Good grief.....
The comment from pp: "They broke up. So the convoluted theory that she hired him so that he could spend her office's money on her doesn't work anymore."

My response: They went on 5 trips together.

Now, use your critical thinking skills.

[Anonymous]

What will the spin be when it turns out there were a half dozen other people there with them working on previous RICO cases?