Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "GA Case"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous] They still haven't conclusively proven the alleged timeline or any inappropriate benefit [/quote] Why do they have to do that? For a disbarment hearing or perjury trial, perhaps. Even without the phone records, I think they showed enough in court to have her removed from the case, with the judge not believing their story concocted to prevent the perjury trial or disbarment. People are under no obligation to accept this story as true, that she repaid in cash. The only reason they needed to have that claim is as a defense against receiving gifts that came out of taxpayer money which she approved the providing of taxpayer money to Wade because she was in a relationship with him. Their defense is the relationship started after she got the contract, and there were no gifts because she repaid the money. When asked why she has no bank records for these thousands of dollars, her defense is she paid in cash. [/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
