JUST IN: Nathan Wade’s Lawyer Gets GRILLED As Defense Brings Out Damning Receipts

In the unfolding legal drama that could completely up-end the high-profile case against former President Donald Trump, the divorce lawyer of Nathan Wade, Terrence Bradley, took the stand amidst a swirl of controversy and speculation.

The testimony, fraught with evasions and a lack of concrete details, centered around the timeline of Wade’s romantic involvement with Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. The relationship’s origins are under scrutiny, as its timing could potentially disqualify Willis from her role in the Georgia election fraud case against Trump.

This sequence. They’re so done 😭 pic.twitter.com/6UG5JLM6Iv

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) February 27, 2024

Bradley, once Wade’s law partner, found himself in the hot seat, pressed repeatedly to clarify when the relationship between Wade and Willis began. Despite the intensity of the questioning, Bradley’s responses were marked by uncertainty and speculation, leaving the courtroom in ambiguity.

Bradley’s testimony was challenged for its admissibility in court. “It was– I was speculating. I didn’t have a… Um… No one told me that,” Bradley confessed. “You know, it was speculation. I can’t tell you anything specific, if that’s what you’re asking.”

Attorney Ashleigh Merchant did not let it slide, continuing to grill Bradley on his “speculation.”

Terrence Bradley, Nathan Wade’s former law partner, testifies that he was “speculating” about when Wade's relationship with Fulton County DA Fani Willis started:

“I never witnessed anything. … I can't tell you anything specific, if that's what you're asking.” pic.twitter.com/SVu03mVJpr

— The Recount (@therecount) February 27, 2024

The core of the issue lies in whether Willis’ relationship with Wade, which preceded his hiring to prosecute Trump, could present a conflict of interest significant enough to warrant her removal from the case. The implications of such a development are profound, not only for the individuals involved but for the integrity of the legal process in high-stakes political litigation.

Bradley’s testimony took a less-than-credible turn with his inconsistent recollections about Wade and Fani Willis’ travels together. The courtroom dynamic became particularly charged when text messages were introduced by Merchant contradicting Bradley’s statements, sparking a dispute over the integrity of the evidence. After an attempt by Wade’s team to block the documents from being shown, Judge Scott McAfee quickly overruled it.

Bradley’s credibility came under intense scrutiny as he seemed to offer multiple narratives of his knowledge regarding the trips Wade and Willis reportedly took.

WATCH:

At one point, the attorney pressed Bradley, “Do you remember telling me that it didn’t surprise you that they took the trips that I found in the divorce file because they took many trips to Florida, Texas, California…?” to which Bradley responded with uncertainty, “I don’t recall that.”

To mitigate the mounting tension, Merchant offered Bradley the use of his own phone to review the messages, a proposal aimed at ensuring fairness in the proceedings.

Bradley seemed overwhelmed, ultimately opting to rely on the provided documents rather than engaging with the evidence on his own phone. “You can just provide the documents.” Bradley conceded, marking a moment of resignation in his face.

During the tense hearing two weeks ago, defense lawyers spent hours trying to persuade Bradley to answer questions about when Willis and Wade’s romantic relationship started. Bradley, however, refused to answer, arguing that any information he may have obtained during his time defending Wade in his divorce proceedings was protected by attorney-client privilege.

Judge McAfee appeared to accept Bradley’s attorney-client privilege until he ruled otherwise, reopening the matter.

McAfee stated that the only way to address the issue was to arrange a secret, closed-door conference — known as an “in camera” session — with Bradley and his counsel to determine which material Bradley possesses is protected by privilege and which is not. That meeting happened on Monday afternoon.

Former Dekalb County District Attorney Robert James stated that the problem presents Judge McAfee with a difficult challenge, requiring him to balance two opposing interests: the exposure of relevant evidence and the safeguarding of a highly cherished principle of legal representation.