mr. wade has now testified to. >> miss merchant, what do you think you can establish and have through the testimony of miss willis? and stop there. >> conflict in the evidence, judge. now that mr. wade has testified there's a conflict of multiple different issues [indiscernible] on the first one is the reimbursement issue, the cash, that opens the door in and of itself to miss willis testifying. >> what's the conflict there? >> that he testified that he didn't have receipts but we don't know if miss willis has receipts. so, that's one issue. >> we don't know, so there's no conflict. don't know. >> so it's a question, not a conflict. what else. >> that is a question. and a lot of different issues with different reasons. first one would be the receipts. you know, whether or not these cash payments were payment receipts, belize trip, whether or not she paid for the entire thing in cash, mr. wade does not have knowledge of that. and a lot of things he could not remember so now it goes to miss willis, unfortunately. that he testified that she insists on paying her own way, gave him some cash,

mr. wade only 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 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 the d.c. personally because i've had a lot of personal friends in that area. 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. -- 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. therefore i'll just ask it and your honor can decide. when you went to d.c., did you go to the white house? >> i did not get to the white house. >> i'm going to gets i think way. next question. >> you indicated your best recollection is that your relationship with mr. wade, the romantic relationship, ended -- you left it in august of 2023. that sound right? >> that's the heart conversation. >> we've c

mr. wade? i was not personal or business. no, ma'am. mr. wade have not been to dc at the same time? however, since mr. wade has been on this case, he's been at isi since mr. wade has been onto this case. i've been to dc. 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 what you asked me either via dc personally, because i've got a lot of personal friends in that area. but i know that i have been a dc i didn't interview at howard university. i went to dc for that seemed like i've been a dc1 other oh, i went to dc for the global summit those were two separate rooms >> my next question is based on her opening the door, and therefore, i'll just ask it in, your honor, can decide whether or not it's appropriate when you went to dc, 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. >> you have it. next question. okay. >> you indicated your best recollection was that you relationship with mr. wade, a romantic relationship? ended you will have to get august of 2023 that

mr. wade has testified there's a conflict in multiple different on the first one is an embarrassment issue on the cash that would be the door so here's goal is testifying. >> well, what's what's the conflict there >> he testified that he didn't have receipts but we don't know who's willing so that i wanted so we don't we don't know. so there's no conflict. we just don't know. so it's a question, not a conflict. but what what else >> and there's a lot of different issues reasons. the first one would be the receipts >> whether or not these cash payments >> at the believes trapped, whether or not she paid for the entire thing in cash >> and have knowledge of that. remember, a lot of things he couldn't remember. so now it goes to school. it's unfortunate that. he testified that she insists on paying her way, gave him some cash that's the boat. some cash miami trip booked it abroad. it would balance out couple of 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 but it was very vague about th

mr. wade prior to november 1, 2021, about mr. wade dating ms. willis? >> mr. wade has risen, an objection is sustained for the record. excuse me, mr. ev apples -- ev apples -- evans. you don't have to answer the question. next question. >> i understand it's been objected to and recorded. sustain the objection. can you tell us the circumstances in which, that is under which mr. wade may have told you about dating -- what i want to do is try to find out if -- you tell me if i can do this, i want to know how the communications themselves took place. where they took place, how they took place, under what circumstances, whether he was at the time providing advice or seeking advice? so those are the basics. if you're going to sustain the objections to those, i don't want to waste your time. >> that's something i'll cover in camera. i'll note the question and the -- the question for the record and i'll sustain the privileged objection to that. >> all of this is prior to november 1, 2021. ok? i'm going to show you two text messages. >> i'm going to have objections. >> i realiz

mr. wade prior to november 1, 2021, about mr. wade dating ms. willis? >> mr. wade has risen, an objection is sustained for the record. excuse me, mr. ev apples -- ev apples -- evans. you don't have to answer the question. next question. >> i understand it's been objected to and recorded. sustain the objection. can you tell us the circumstances in which, that is under which mr. wade may have told you about dating -- what i want to do is try to find out if -- you tell me if i can do this, i want to know how the communications themselves took place. where they took place, how they took place, under what circumstances, whether he was at the time providing advice or seeking advice? so those are the basics. if you're going to sustain the objections to those, i don't want to waste your time. >> that's something i'll cover in camera. i'll note the question and the -- the question for the record and i'll sustain the privileged objection to that. >> all of this is prior to november 1, 2021. ok? i'm going to show you two text messages. >> i'm going to have objections. >> i realiz

mr. wade. >> that will limit the merit and credibility. i will just ask the question. i understand your testimony is it is the same time as of mr. wade. however, since mr. wade hasn on this case, he's been in d.c. since he has been on this case i've been d.c. we have not been in the district of columbia at the same time. the only thing that i am not sure about is what you asked me. i have a lot of personal friends in that area. i know that i have been to d.c. a big interview at howard university. i went to d.c. for that. i went to d.c. for the global summit. those were two separate trips. >> my next question is based on her opening the door. i will just ask for you to decide whether or not it is important. >> i did not go to the white house. >> apparently i am going to get the answer anyhow. >> i am not sure that the tough conversation did not happen until after. he would say june or july. physical contact. being a woman, it is over when you have that hard conversation. men and women think differently. >> the question was she was not sure. >> i'm not sure that that was her answer. >> it is what i said. that is what i said. >> next question. >> one more. the roma

>> i don't know why -- the foundation has already been made. >> your 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 has paid that money back, or he was paid due to the fact that i about the plane ticket. i paid for the hotel. there was never money that he gave me. that was not the nature of their relationship. there is so many men, and mr. wade is one of them, they are just paying for a woman. it is companionship and friendship. despite the way people would like to paint certain women, it is just not true. >> final question. not a single solitary documentary showing that you have withdrawn the cash to pay him back. >> that's not accurate. >> okay, mr. floyd. mr. cromwell. >> one question. in the time period between february 2021 and january 2022, did your father ever come and visit you during that time period? >> he did not. >> that's all i have. >> i would imagine you have a number of topics to cover with ms. willis. it will take more than 10 to 15 minutes. okay. then i think we have reached a stopping point for the

mr. wade is my friend right now. mr. wade i would say has been my friend since 2020. started out lick mentor the and 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 with mr. wade. i consider myself to have a personal relationship with ana cross and i consider to have a personal relationship with andrew evans. >> let me clarify that. >> i have a personal relationship with him as we speak right now. i don't think that's what you're asking. >> when did your romantic relationship with mr. wade end? >> me and mr. wade, we are good friends. my respect for him has grown over these 7 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 submitted that we will be friends to the d

mr. wade. >> that will limit the merit and credibility. i will just ask the question. i understand your testimony is it is the same time as of mr. wade. however, since mr. wade hason this case, he's been in d.c. since he has been on this case i've been d.c. we have not been in the district of columbia at the same time. the only thing that i am not sure about is what you asked me. i have a lot of personal friends in that area. i know that i have been to d.c. a big interview at howard university. i went to d.c. for that. i went to d.c. for the global summit. those were two separate trips. >> my next question is based on her opening the door. i will just ask for you to decide whether or not it is important. >> i did not go to the white house. >> apparently i am going to get the answer anyhow. >> i am not sure that the tough conversation did not happen until after. he would say june or july. physical contact. being a woman, it is over when you have that hard conversation. men and women think differently. >> the question was she was not sure. >> i'm not sure that that was her answer. >> it is what i said. that is what i said. >> next question. >> one more. the romant

mr. wade is my friend right now. mr. wade, i would say has been my friend since 2020. and he started out as like a mentor and 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. abad i. >> let me clarify that. i have a personal relationship with him as we speak right now. >> a romantic relationship. >> i don't think that's what you're asking. >> when did your romantic relationship with mr. wade 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, we would have stopped having. i think that you have

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 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. 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 with mr. wade right now. i consider myself to have a personal relationship with anna cross. i considered myself to have a personal relationship with mr. abati. i consider myself to have a personal relationship with andrew evans -- >> let me clarify that. >> i have a -- >> a romantic -- >> i don't think 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. but for these attacks, it would have been a friendship that as life goes, he would have stopped having. i thin

mr. wade has nothing to do with whether trump and his codefendants tried to interfere with the election. some judges are extra cautious in part because they want to insulate any guilty verdict from appeal, but the judge in manhattan did not come to play. he's on to trump's games and he's ready for them. one drop the mic moment is when todd blanch was complaining it would interfere with trump's campaigning, the judge said, well, hey, last year, march 25th, 2024 looked a long way away. you wrote this letter that said if the trial date started on march 25th, that would be enough time for trump to effectively campaign. >> that's great. the other piece of it is how long it might take. because katie, the question of a six-week trial, you know, they have a star witness in michael cohen, who he's been right about a whole lot. i don't think he's been wrong yet. they have him. they're going to try to impeach him obviously, but given he wrote the check and has the evidence and went to jail for it, should it take six weeks? >> i think you always hedge, joy, on the longer amount of time so that you d

mr. wade is my friend right now. mr. wade, i would say has been my friend since 2020 thank you. started out as 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. abbas i consider myself to have a personal relationship with andrew f. >> let me just clarify. the i have a personal relationship with him as we speak right now, aroma, i don't think that's what you're asking. i think >> when did your romantic relationship with mr. wade end might 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 what for these attacks, it would have been a friendship that as life g

mr. wade has been paid hundreds of thousands of dollars, some of which have made their way to fani willis indirectly through vacations and that sort of thing. the counter narrative that the da chose to pursue is no, no, no. he was hired for his merits. there was no pre-existing romantic relationship kinship, but after he was hired, the relationship develop these things happen. there was never any sort of plan or intentionality about it. so the question of when was an important issue to begin with. and now it's amplified many times over because the da has taken a very strong under oath position that it did not start until after the question to me, jake is who will the judge credit? will the judge credit that scene that we just saw from mr. bradley? i don't recall. i don't recall. it was speculation or will he credit the written specific texts that mr. bradley's sent before when asked again if there was a relationship beforehand, his response was absolutely and then he gave details. so it's hard to believe he was lying then and then today in court when it was all i don't recall today was th

mr. wade as your client, correct? mr. bradley: correct. mr. sadow: you understand that the court has ruled that communications that you had with mr. wade are not privileged, correct? mr. bradley: no, i'm aware that the court ruled that one specific dealing with the timeframe of one specific conversation was not privileged. mr. sadow: i'm going to ask your honor, if the statute of limitations -- judge mcafee: you asked whether all communication's with mr. wade recovered. that was not the extent of the ruling. the only ones i deemed not covered that i asked about in the in camera hearing that were relevant were any communication's mr. wade made regarding the existence or nonexistence of a romantic relationship with ms. willis. mr. sadow: thank you, your honor, i understand. going back to live in court, when you say you do not have personal knowledge, what i want to ask you to start with is very simple. did you have communications with mr. wade about the relationship between mr. wade and ms. willis? it is a simple yes or no. mr. bradley: yes. mr. sadow: and is it your testimony that dur

as i go through the questions he has knowledge of things that is not something that mr. wade specifically told him. i think there is a fraud exception to a lot of this. i don't think there was a privilege for most of it. >> he represented he has no knowledge. >> i don't think we've gotten anything to that extent yet. i think we're still making our way through it, which is i think he is taking the position that he is not willing to share anything mr. wade ever told him period, which that's a broader representation of attorney/client privilege than i've ever heard and i think that's what we're trying to parse out. if the relationship starts i've never heard everything that said everything before that point is privileged. do you have something that i should know? >> before that relationship being established, in 2018, december, the last question was related to a point in time after that during which the relationship attorney/client was already established. he has an opinion from the state bar of georgia that he will be required to testify and ordered by the court to many of thes

mr. wade? once the motion was filed due to meet with mr. wade to talk about the motion filed? >> i probably has some choice words. i don't know that it was a conversation. as you know mr. wade is a southern gentleman. me, not so much. >> did you have a conversation? >> no, i did not. i probably said some choice things to him about some of the lies that were told within the media. we used to be in the state and time where people would verify information and we had great reporting. but as we've seen today a lawyer can lie and is printed for the world to say. >> i just wanted to ask -- >> we had no substantive conversation, we did not. >> i just wanted to make sure. you did not have a meeting with him in the conference room to discuss it? >> in the conference room in my office you could view financial documents. they were given to me and i think he showed me a document in our conference room. as far as a substantive conversation. i have had conversation since you filed the motion but they would not be substantive to this. they would be nice sermons. we had conversations about did you listen to tha

asking for is knowledge there were law partners as i go to the questions he has knowledge of things that's not something mr. wade specifically told him i also think there is a fraud exception to a lot of this. i don't that there was for most of it. >> your honor he has no knowledge about the. >> we haven't gotten anything to that extent yet. [laughter] we are still making our way through it which he is taking the position he is not willing to share anything mr. wade ever told him. which is a broader representation of attorney-client privilege that i have ever heard. i think that is what we are trying to parse out if the relationship starts i've never heard anything said everything before that point is privilege. it is or something i should know? yes or that's fine. [inaudible] relationship established 2019 december the last question is directly to point time after that. he has from the state board of georgia is required to testify on these issues and i understood how delicate this is. we can place it in different ways to make them say something. but everything he puts onto the university violates that and goes b

mr. wade is a way that provides her an incentive to keep the case going. mr. wade hasot earned more than $650,000 in 2021 while spending money on joint vacations he has taken with fani willis. ms. willis has set the cost of joint personal travel has been divided roughly evenly between her and mr. rate. -- and mr. wade. in interviews with black women at various stages of their careers black women expressed they were painfully conflicted about her situation and her treatment in the public eye. to many there is something calling about watching mr. trump and his allies attacked ms. willis over a consensual romantic relationship when he is faced accusations of misconduct and assault. he was recently ordered to pay $83.3 million to each on carol for defaming her. a jury found trump liable for sexually abusing carol. her misconduct was a mistake but not one that should remove her from the case. others thinking about their own experiences in the workplace suggested other concerns. they feel black women are held to a different standard in ms. willis should have known that her i

mr. wade, who apparently has some information it has communicated by text and email with the defense attorneys about that. so if these records back up, something mr. bradley tells a judge in chambers and cameron private, or if mr. bradley tells him something that backs up the records in private, i think they become particularly critical. i mean, this this is about like watching somebody on the titanic say, well, the iceberg is really not that big. this is a big deal in the sense that it could very well undermine the credibility of the district attorney and mr. wade. that's a problem going forward because the judge has got to make a decision on whether or not there has been some appearance of conflict or has there been some false filing or statement made to the court if that's the case, then i think she's got a problem. i don't know yet, but i do know that prosecutors and law enforcement use this type of cell phone tracking data, all the tab so additions here now the district attorney's office, kevin and say, well, it really been proven anything, it's not a big deal. that's just not the case. i

the second i think there has been a representation that mr. wadepreserves and doesn't wave anything. asking him particular question in order to potentially back door a waver is inappropriate and that's my objection. >> 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 that's -- we can establish those, you know, parameters, but miss 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 miss willis is subject to an attorney/client privilege. not if you and miss willis have one, but do you believe that relationship is subject to one? >> i object to that question in how it is phrased into what context. any conversation with his attorneys is privileged. that, i think, is clear. what is not clear to me from that question is that -- is miss merchant asking in the context of your communication with your attorneys is that or outside that context is it? >> right. and miss merchant, we need

mr. wade as your client, correct? >> correct. >> do you understand that the court has ruled that communications that you had with mr. wade are not privileged, correct? aware that the court ruled that one specific dealing with the time frame of one specific conversation wasn't privileged. >> then i'm going to ask your honor if a statute of limitation -- >> to clarify. sure. mr. sadow, you asked whether all communications with mr. wade were covered. that was not the extent of the ruling. the only ones that i deemed were not covered and that i had asked him about because those are the ones that were irrelevant. any communications mr. wade regarding the existence or nonexistence of a romantic relationship with miss willis. >> fine. thank you, your honor, i understand. so going back to this live inquiry. when you say you don't have personal knowledge, what i want to ask you to start with is very simple. did you have communications with mr. wade about the relationship between mr. wade and miss willis? it's a simple yes and no. >> yes. >> okay. and is it your testimony that during the time you were representing him, which i

mr. wade as your client, correct? >> correct. >> you understand that the court has ruled that communications that you had with mr. wade are not privileged, correct? >> no, i'm aware that the court ruled that one specific dealing with the time frame of one specific conversation wasn't privileged. >> then i'm going to ask your honor, if it's at the limitation -- >> clarify -- mr. sadow, you asked whether all communications with mr. wade i think were covered? that was not the extent of the ruling. the only ones that i deemed were not covered and that i had asked about in the in camera hearing because those are the ones that were relevant were any communications mr. wade made regarding the existence or nonexistence of a romantic relationship with mrs. willis. >> fine. thank you, your honor. i understand. >> so going pack to this line of inquiry. when you say you don't have personal knowledge, what i want to ask you to start with, have simple, did you have communications with mr. wade about the relationship between mr. wade and mrs. willis? a simple yes and no. >> yes. >> and is it your testimony today that during the

mr. wade as your client, correct >> correct. >> you understand that the court has ruled that communications that you had with mr. way are not privilegedcorrect >> no, i'm i'm aware that the court ruled that one specific dealing with the timeframe of one specific conversation wasn't privileged >> then i'm going to ask, your honor, if sadow limitation the clarifying he made. sure mr. sadow, you asked whether all communications with mr. wade i think we're covered. that was not the extent of the ruling. the only ones that i deemed were not covered and that i'd asked about in the in camera hearing because those are the ones that were relevant were any communications mr. wade made regarding the existence or nonexistence of a romantic relationship with ms willis? >> fine. thanks, your honor. i understand. so, going back to line of inquiry, when you say you don't have personal knowledge, what i want to ask you to start with very simple did you have communications with mr. wade about the relationship between mr. wade and ms willis so simple, yes or no? yes >> and >> is it your testimony that during

valencia has more >> did you lie to ms merchant when you told her facts about mr. wade and mr. willis's relationship. >> cnn has obtained over 400 text messages that showed this man, terrence bradley, was more deeply involved than previously known in advising the effort to disqualify but i fulton county district attorney, fani willis. >> so as as an attorney yourself, you are testifying here under oath that you had no idea what ms merchant was going to do with all the details that you are giving her about wade and willis's relationship? >> so at the time no, i did not. >> earlier this week on the witness stan bradley, nathan wade's divorce attorney, repeatedly said he could not recall details about willis and nathan wade's relationship, but in text messages obtained by cnn just days before the allegations of a conflict of interests were initially filed. holding court. bradley told ashleigh merchant, the defense attorney for trump's co-defendant, that wade and willis were absolutely interrelationship before she hired him. >> is >> this accurate merchant rights upon information an

mr. wade? once the motion was filed due to meet with mr. wade to talk about the motion filed? >> i probably has some choice words. i don't know that it was a conversation. as you know mr. wade is a southern gentleman. me, not so much. >> did you have a conversation? >> no, i did not. i probably said some choice things to him about some of the lies that were told within the media. we used to be in the state and time where people would verify information and we had great reporting. but as we've seen today a lawyer can lie and is printed for the world to say. >> i just wanted to ask -- >> we had no substantive conversation, we did not. >> i just wanted to make sure. you did not have a meeting with him in the conference room to discuss it? >> in the conference room in my office you could view financial documents. they were given to me and i think he showed me a document in our conference room. as far as a substantive conversation. i have had conversation since you filed the motion but they would not be substantive to this. they would be nice sermons. we had conversations about did you listen to tha

has been yes, correct? >> very limited contact because mr. wade had a form of cancer and makes your allegations somewhat ridiculous. >> i do appreciate the characterization. >> i'm not going to emasculate a black man. did you understand that? >> next question. >> i'm trying to, your honor. would you tell us on the occasions in 2020 that you had contact with mr. wade. >> i thought i had answered that. there were times in 2020 i had contact. but 2020 was a year i was running for office. it was a year he was going through some serious medical issues. and i did not have much contact. 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? >> am sure -- that's a very good question. i'm sure he came to 750 in 2020. >> that was my office. not often, but maybe once or twice. maybe went to his office once or twice. maybe once. >> and the purpose for going to his office would have been what? >> maybe we would have went to piz

mr. wade and district attorney willis has an attorney client relationship? it is not there's no foundation for that if the question to the witnesses does his relationship with district attorney willis impact >> his attorney-client relationship with his divorce attorneys that i don't think it's an appropriate question for that for that witness. >> first, >> if the first i believe is a proper praising, the second, i think there's been a representation that mr. wade preserves and doesn't wave anything. so i think asking him particular questions in order to potentially backdoor a waiver is inappropriate all right. >> if we're just trying to again, assess where a privileged does or does not exist and we're not actually getting into it. i think that's 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 a few. and ms willis have one. but do you believe that that r

. >> i'm not sure that's accurate, he has been accused by mr. wade, his client. do you mind if i speak, i allowed you to speak? mr. wade accused this gentleman of misconduct in the performance activity while he is an attorney working with mr. wade and representing mr. wade, those allegations of misconduct open up the question of whether or not he can defend himself -- himself by now discussing communications with mr. wade in connection with representation, as well as the allegations, that's the position of -- position of the defense. >> what's the question? my question of what i'm going ask you now is, tell us whip mr. wade told you about when he began his relationship with miss willis. >> where i think we are -- >> where i think we are with this is, mr. radley previously testified that the reason he left the firm was totally and completely covered by privilege. when asked by the state, he went into a factual scenario that, to my mind, i don't know how it relates to privilege at all. so now i'm left wondering if mr. bradley has been properly interpreting privileg

mr. wade so the judge will have to weigh the credibility of all those people who has the most at stake. remember, even ms willis has acknowledged that mr. wade would come visit her alone in her townhouse where she had moved into majorities town pass during 2021. and so that is before the relationship is alleged to have begun and so that may give the judge some pause to again, i don't know that i can say that today they the defense met their burden, but there's more testimony tomorrow and we'll certainly see if we get into this issue of the lawyer and this text message and he was doing with the defense attorney. apparently, there's some comments in there that she'd like to show and i don't know that that issue has been put too bad yet. >> you will have to look for that. >> laura, there >> was a moment today, i think it was really kind of the moment one of the quotes from willis, his testimony that stands out, let's listen so your office objected to us getting delta records for flights that you may have taken when mr. wade well >> i object to you getting record. you've been intrusive into

mr. wade ever visit you -- he has never been to my home in south fulton. 2020 was before i knew a phone call would be made and i would have to abandon my home. as a result thereof, he never visited, lived at, came to, or has seen south fullerton. >> you qualified that with your home in south fullerton. >> that's write lived in 2020. >> in 2020 did he ever visit you at a place where you resided? >> i don't understand. in 2020 i live in south fullerton. that's the only place i lived in south fullerton. that was before i had to abandon my home, judge, and at my home in south fullerton, he never came there, okay? so if you don't come some place, you can't live there. >> i'm going to have to caution you, this is going to be my first time to caution you, 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. >> sean: wow! even the media mob, they were forced to admit that today was a complete disaster for willis and her case against donald trump. take a look. >> don't let the legalese fool you. this is epic, monumental. if th

she plans to call a witness who will prove willis and wade are lying about when their relationship began, the relevant information that mr. bradley has to this inquiry is that this relationship started prior to mr. wade being appointed as a special prosecutor in this case, bradley, the onetime friend, colleague, and divorce attorney of nathan wade, appears to be merchant star witness. merchant, who represents trump co-defendant mike roman, signaled she had financial evidence to prove wrongdoing, but didn't offer any specifics in court on monday mr. roman, that has tried to create a circus charlie bailey, a close friend of willis and political ally, says, willis has never backed down from a >> fight and has no plans to recuse herself. >> she's pretty tough and it's not the worst thing. she's been through in the context of this case. >> or >> in her in her life so far, romans motion to have willis thrown off the rico case has been adopted by six co defendants, including trump, a scenario where willis is disqualified would be a nightmare for the da, but wouldn't necessarily mean an immediate end of the case, according to pete skandalaki

mr. wade, we are good friends. my respect for him has grown the last seven weeks of attacks. we are good friends. this would have been up friendship who have stopped having and you have submitted we will be friends until the day we die. >> you asked about personal relationships. >> it as one personal relationship ended. >> i would say late summer of 2023. i believe that what you're asking really. >> asking about your romantic relationship. >> i think me and mr. wade, he's a man, i would say june or july. i would say we have tough conversations. so the relationships in the physical intimacy, but it became a relationship the conversation. >> he comes to a condo apartment, did he stay at the connor visit you there? >> what condo, apartment? i want to be clear. >> one of the houses and one of the condos the ability to understand -- >> if you could ask a more precise. >> give me the time. >> a place. has he ever visited you at the place you lay your head? >> this is the truth. it is a lie. >> we are going to take five minutes.

has no knowledge. so on to your next question. >> okay. did mr. wade tell you about the trips he and miss willis took? >> no. >> do you have any knowledge of the trips? >> objection, hearsay. >> overruled. >> i do now. >> okay. but you did not before this proceeding? >> i did not know until you texts that you found that in the deposition of his divorce. i may not -- not deposition, but something from his divorce. >> okay. when you responded, doesn't surprise me. they took many trips to florida, texas, california. those are your words? >> objection. he actually learned from miss merchant the information. >> he said he learned about certain trips. >> okay, you can tie it down. we'll see. >> no information on any trips that miss willis and miss wade took. that he learned it all from miss merchant. >> sure. any conclusion we reach. i think she's going to ask more than one question though. >> and if judge, just so we can be clear, if he said more than one version, that's all relevant. we're allowed to talk about the different versions that he's told. >> i'v

mr. wade is a distinguished attorney. he has done a great job on this case, defeated some of the best lawyers in the country in court, got four guilty pleas. the right thing for him to do to help us get past this now is to say, hey, i'm going to go out on a high note and say in order to avoid distraction, close the books on this, i'm going to voluntarily step away. i think that's what he should do. she must stay. she was democratically elected to prosecute these kinds of crimes. >> we will see what happens. great to see you in person. always a pleasure. >>> coming up for us, patrick maholmes has a chance to strengthen his argument for being the g.o.a.t. as he tries to win his third super bowl in a few years. the 49ers will have something to say about it. we will discuss just how much of a say they have with rachel nichols straight ahead. you are in the "cnn newsroom." two leading candidates for senate. two very different visions for california. steve garvey, the leading republican, is too conservative for california. he voted fo

it was one of those. >> he has now said he has no knowledge, on to the next question. >> ok. did mr. wadeell you about the trips he and miss willis took? >> no. >> do you have any knowledge of the trips he and miss willis took. >> objection, hearsay. >> overruled. >> i do now. >> ok. but you did not before this proceeding? >> i did not know until you texted that you found that in the deposition of his divorce. not deposition, but something from his divorce. >> ok. and when you responded, doesn't surprise me they took many trips to florida, texas, california, those are your words, right? >> object as to relevance. he said he did not know and he learned from miss merchant the information. >> he said he learned about certain trips from miss merchant. >> ok. you can tie it down, but -- we'll see. >> thank you. >> no information on any trips that miss willis and mr. wade took that he learned it all from miss merchant. that was his testimony. >> sure. conclusion we reach, i think she's going to ask more than one question, though. all right, miss merchant. >> judge, so we can be clear, if he sai

s office has with mr. wade that the d.a. herself is profiting from? is what he said i am interested in. there is so far uncontradicted evidence from mr. wade and ms. willis that they didn't -- they split everything. there's a whole issue about, you know, is it credible? because there's an issue of he paid times, she paid at times, and she says i repaid in cash and i didn't use venmo or zelle or any sort of app. but there is no contrary evidence. so to my mind, what i'm looking for is will there be contrary evidence to that issue, the finance issue presented by the defense? because that's why we're here. >> right, so charles we're going to hear from this terrence bradley, who's a former divorce lawyer for nathan wade, also former business partner for nathan wade. they've worked out the attorney/client privilege issues that were all tangling things up yesterday at the start of the hearing, if you are michael roman's attorney who brought this allegation forward and are trying to get the case dismissed on all of this, what needs to happen today? >> michae

mr. trump so that she can go take trips with him. i mean, that is the whole theory here. that she has some financial interest and gain by hiring mr. wades can be deceiving. and the reality has to be, is there a personal interest or strength in the conviction of the defendant, and i don't believe that's been proven. >> i got 20 seconds. do you think she made the right legal call to testify? >> that is a perception. i have gotten so many texts today from women saying she's done a phenomenal job. she had to push back, and then there are a lot of men who are saying, why didn't she calm down? she had to be more -- have showed more decorum. she should have been more of a lawyer. again, i think you and i have both watched witnesses on the stand and come away with totally different versions of what they say. >> i certainly think she has every right to go up and defend herself as she did. the legal question is could they have carried that without the testimony then why put yourself out there, but again, that's one you can debate. thanks for joining us. i want to remind everyone to tune in "the beat" tomorrow, saturday, 4:00 p.m. eastern. we hav