The case against Fani Willis

Another thing....

I'm not sure if people caught this part of Fani's testimony. It seemed as if she threatened the life of, or the daily aspects of her ex-friend Yearti, because Yearti was subpoenaed to testify.

Fani said concerning Yearti, "What goes around comes around." To me that was a terroristic threat made by someone on a witness stand under oath.
 
Last edited:
Whistleblowers often lead to criminal indictments.


Yes .. with cash .. no receipts .. no sourcing of funds except $50 here and $50 there

She never said $50 here, #50 there. She was asked a question about if amounts widthdrawn from her accounts correlated to the reimbusement, which she said no. She never said that she didn't take larger withdrawls, she said they didn't correlate to times and amounts.

(outside of Fani accidently slipping that she used campaign funds) . Nothing to see here. It's ripe.

Below is the transcript of her testimony the word campaign appears exactly one when when she's talking about PUTTING $50,000 of her own retire money into the campaign not taking it out.

So please post the part of her testimony that supports your claim.

WW
.
.
.
.
.
 
I am wondering what this has to do with the Georgia case against Trump and others.
I havent been following it closely so I might have missed something.
But she had an affair with a colleague on the case. That is not unusual in any walk of life. It seems that there are questions about some receipts.
But how does it impact on the case against trump. Ms Willis has already scalped several of the conspirators in this case. It doesnt look good for those who are still standing.
If she is brought down surely someone else would take up the case and see it to its conclusion ?
That is what would happen in a civilised country that is run by the rule of law.
I cant see a link between Ms Willis and the case against trump. It seems to be clutching at strawx.
It remains to be seen if someone else would take the case. That falls to a guy who doesn't seem particularly inclined. He would have to order someone to prosecute the case or hire an outside lawyer. It is hard to find outside lawyers because the pay is absolute crap. It is why they have such trouble in most places finding lawyers willing to do court-appointed cases. They limit the pay and the number of hours you are allowed to bill so you might only be getting a few hundred bucks a case regardless of how long they take. As a result, those defendants get crappy representation.
 
I am wondering what this has to do with the Georgia case against Trump and others.
I havent been following it closely so I might have missed something.
But she had an affair with a colleague on the case. That is not unusual in any walk of life. It seems that there are questions about some receipts.
But how does it impact on the case against trump. Ms Willis has already scalped several of the conspirators in this case. It doesnt look good for those who are still standing.
If she is brought down surely someone else would take up the case and see it to its conclusion ?
That is what would happen in a civilised country that is run by the rule of law.
I cant see a link between Ms Willis and the case against trump. It seems to be clutching at strawx.

If Willis is removed from the case, the prosecution will likely never happen. It definitely won't happen before the election and that's the whole point of the exercise, - to delay this case until after the election and Trump wins, or seizes power.

The ONLY way Trump can have Willis removed from the case is to prove the she is financially benefitting from her prosecution of this case. She has to be proven to be making money from the prosecution.

To that end, Trump is claiming that Ms. Willis, who reports a net worth of $8 million and annual income of $1.5 million from multiple investments and sources, is prosecuting Donald Trump in order to obtain less than $20,000 in free travel benefits from Fulton County over the past 2+ years.

See also slut shaming. How dare this woman who has been divorced since 2005, have sex with a co-worker in 2022, who separated from his wife in 2019. What a slattern!! These black women have no morals.

Notice how "morality" is always defined by sex with these assholes. A woman who has sex is "immoral". A man who has sex is a real stud.
 
If Willis is removed from the case, the prosecution will likely never happen. It definitely won't happen before the election and that's the whole point of the exercise, - to delay this case until after the election and Trump wins, or seizes power.

The ONLY way Trump can have Willis removed from the case is to prove the she is financially benefitting from her prosecution of this case. She has to be proven to be making money from the prosecution.

To that end, Trump is claiming that Ms. Willis, who reports a net worth of $8 million and annual income of $1.5 million from multiple investments and sources, is prosecuting Donald Trump in order to obtain less than $20,000 in free travel benefits from Fulton County over the past 2+ years.

See also slut shaming. How dare this woman who has been divorced since 2005, have sex with a co-worker in 2022, who separated from his wife in 2019. What a slattern!! These black women have no morals.

Notice how "morality" is always defined by sex with these assholes. A woman who has sex is "immoral". A man who has sex is a real stud.
Ive noticed the usual misoginy and racism involved.
 
Ok. But the answer would be to change prosecutor. None of this impacts on the charges against trump.
He broke the law and should face justice.
Well, nobody has proven he broke the law.

And yes, this impacts Trump case, and well..every case she's brought...she is now proven to have committed a fraud on the court. Nothing she touched can be credible

Much like when you all put your faith in Michael Avanitti....I am starting to see a trend among the Dembots and their "get trump" heroes .... they are all crooked
 
She never said $50 here, #50 there. She was asked a question about if amounts widthdrawn from her accounts correlated to the reimbusement, which she said no. She never said that she didn't take larger withdrawls, she said they didn't correlate to times and amounts.
Yes she did ... in her last testimony on the stand .. do your homework. Then she admitted (slipped) that she pulled funds from her campaign funds.

Segment 12 of her transcript and she admitted, accidently, to embezzling cash from her political campaign funds... When you tell lies .. it just gets deeper and deeper.

WILLIS: Cash is fungible. It have cash for years in my house. So for me to tell you the source of when it comes from, when you go to Publix then you buy something, you have $50, you throw it in there. It's been my whole life.

When I took out a large amount of money on my first campaign, I kept some of the cash of that. Like, to tell you, I just have cash in my house. I don't have as much today as I would normally have, but I'm building back up now. So you just put money in. It's a very good practice. I would advise it to all women.
Below is the transcript of her testimony the word campaign appears exactly one when when she's talking about PUTTING $50,000 of her own retire money into the campaign not taking it out.

So please post the part of her testimony that supports your claim.

WW
.
.
.
.
.
That's a portion of her testimony .. read it here from the same source CNN

Bingo .. unethical .. she can't prove how the sex affairs were funded .. and admitted to using campaign funds. :popcorn:
 
She dated a co worker.
SO................that negates ANYTHING, Trump did.
They have much to protect. This ain't just politics. This is personal for them, a lifestyle, their self esteem.
Well, when you pay $399 for a politicians Chinese made GOLD sneakers.....................

SNAKE OIL SALESMAN definition - Cambridge Dictionary​

1708367234855.jpeg
Cambridge Dictionary
https://dictionary.cambridge.org › dictionary › english

someone who deceives people in order to get money from them: He was dubbed a "modern day snake oil salesman" after he ripped off thousands of internet customers ...
 
Yes she did ... in her last testimony on the stand .. do your homework. Then she admitted (slipped) that she pulled funds from her campaign funds.

Segment 12 of her transcript and she admitted, accidently, to embezzling cash from her political campaign funds... When you tell lies .. it just gets deeper and deeper.



That's a portion of her testimony .. read it here from the same source CNN

Bingo .. unethical .. she can't prove how the sex affairs were funded .. and admitted to using campaign funds. :popcorn:

Thank you for the link. The word campaign exists exactly once at the link.

Here is the quote: "When I took out a large amount of money on my first campaign, I kept some of the cash of that. Like, to tell you, I just have cash in my house. I don't have as much today as I would normally have, but I'm building back up now. So you just put money in. It's a very good practice. I would advise it to all women."

That is not saying she took money out of her campaign finances (i.e. donor money). It's say she took a large amount of money out of her personal accounts, kept part of it in cash, AND THEN used the remainder (i.e. $50,000) to give to the campaign for funding.

If I take $60,000 out of my personal accounts, keep $10,000, and then donate $50,000 -- that does not mean I took $10K from a campaign account.

The key is she said she took money out (of her personal accounts) "on my first campaign", which does not mean took money FROM the campaign.

WW
.
.
.

1708367075001.png
 

Forum List

Back
Top