TAINTED LOVE

 Okay, I've been watching a lot of old music videos I admit it ...

This post is about the GA case against the lawyersprosecuting Mr. Trump ... I'll remember the names here in a bit.

It has been discovered that there were thousands of emails/texts from his phone, which tracted/pinged back to her apartment almost a month before SHE says they started dating, or as she called it "became romantically involved" .... I got more on this one later.

So they are saying they were in the relationship BEFORE he was hired, and he was hired to back up her case as well  asget a second income into this relationship ... whatever their argument is ...

MY QUESTION NOW is:

        If the relationship started AFTER he was an employee ... then wouldn't this fall under the Sexual Harrassment clause??

Most companies, that I know of, have a clause that says you cannot have a relationship with anyone who works FOR you.  
You can work for the same company, but NOT on the same project/room/case ...

I would also think the irs - you know that group that the President wanted more of to catch cheaters - will likely WANT TO LOOK AT this gal!!!

If she has all this money in cash, you can almost guess that no federal taxes, no FICA, no STATE taxes, etc. - look at your pay stub and see what gets taken out - was PAID .... NONE.

IF the relationship began after he began working, the question to the other lawyers working on the case should be ....    
    Did she ever mention that the relationship began And if not, what would be the reason not to mention it.
    Did she ever approach anyone else in the office?

I used to work with in a company, a national daycare center, where several people dated each other -- one was office personale and a worker (he was a guy) ...shortly afterwards, SHE got transferred to another center, there didn't appear to be any issue but just to avoid the appearance of a conflict-of-interest they moved her.

I'm guessing THAT'S what should have happened here ... once one because the superior/boss of the other, the situation should have been resolved, cleared up, avoided completely.

But that didn't happen.

And to the calls that if SHE is removed from the case and anoher attorney assigned making the case against Mr. Trump "go away" ...
That's is NOT a "given" here.

GA has spent a LOT of taxpayer money building this case ... even if both lawyers weren't involved, there was still a staff used to do research, background checks, vetting, etc.
Even if these people are removed ... the taxpayers are going to want their money not to have been wasted.

It is likely that a new lawyer might feel that there just isn't a There there ... but, there's no guarenttee.

Now back to that comment above about the "romantic relationship" ....

It has a definate "Bill Clinton" feel to it ....
    Depends on what your definition of "is" is                                    
    I. Did. Not. Have. Sexual> Relations> with> that. woman

Its a parsing of the words ...

She might be thinking "friends with benefits" is NOT a Romantic Relationship, while others might
She might think that sex is a "casual thing" while he does not
She might be "covering her a##" 

I'm jusst saying ... if her statement had come from Mr. Trump -- the news stations would NEVER simply accept it.

Let's also remember ... that for the MOST PART ... all the trials against Mr. Trump will only be PUT ON HOLD if he gets back into office ....
The "Statute of Limitations" will pause, stop, stand still for 4 years or however long he is in office (he could still be removed from office)

A "Presidential Pardon" would only take care of the FEDERAL crimes he is accused of, crimes brought by STATES could still be charged

So .... No .... even if SHE gets removed .... Mr. Trump's problems are far from over.