Reply to GA Case

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "GA Case"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]If the plaintiffs attorneys think Wade isn’t qualified to prosecute felonies, why do they want him removed? He’s done pretty well so far with grand jury indictments, guilty pleas, and defeating plaintiffs’ motions to try to move their cases, claim executive privilege, etc. [/quote]

+1.  If he’s such a bad lawyer, you’d think they’d want to keep him on the case.  The intense focus on getting rid of him suggests that he’s been quite effective.[/quote]

Conflict of interest. Go look it up. Not everything in life is about gaining advantage or unfair advantage.[/quote]

What’s the conflict?  He’s on the same side as his alleged GF.  If he was a defendants lawyer and dating the prosecutor, that would be a conflict.  But not when they are on the same side.[/quote]

Not when Wade's girlfriend is the sole and only person approving Wade's bills including numerous charges of 24 hours billing per day and reaping benefits by approving said "24 hours of billing" per day.[/quote]

The motion doesn't even allege that Willis approves Wade's bills at all, much less that she is the "sole and only person" approving them.  In fact, all of them were approved someone with the initials "ATG," which are not Willis' initials.  So you're just making that up.[/quote]

Also, could you let us know what days there were "numerous charges of 24 hours billing per day?  There are some 24 hour entries but they span over several days.[/quote]

[img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GDa1QVnWQAAxgOb?format=jpg&name=medium[/img][/quote]

You said "numerous charges of 24 hours billing per day."  That's one instance.  His invoices frequently lump multiple days on one line and then charge a lump sum for an activity over all of those days.  Seems like this one instance may be one of those and it was just mislabeled as one day, especially since there are no charges for the day before or several days after.[/quote]

Lawyers who understand how billing is reported (and that different lawyers do it different ways) will understand that this is not a problem.[/quote]

Well, well. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics