What Trump prosecutor Fani Willis’s testimony reveals about the courtroom

newYou can now listen to Fox News articles.

“It’s a lie, it’s a lie!” These words from Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis are a bluff from a prosecutor accused of violating numerous ethics and community rules in the employment of her ex-boyfriend, Nathan Wade. It captured the testimony. Willis suddenly appeared in the courtroom looking like a remake of Perry Mason, and she charged into the witness box with a look of sheer ferocity on her face. She went on to accuse the media, prosecutors, and her ex-girlfriend of various levels of betrayal.

But in some places, Willis bore a striking resemblance to the man she is prosecuting, Donald Trump. Like Mr. Trump, she resisted the court’s request to limit her answers to questions. She attacked her critics, including the media, with disparaging language, but her questions were virtually ignored. But unlike Trump, she got away with it.

Willis did not allow details about the “collusion” of the lawyers who plotted against him and how “these people are on trial for trying to steal the 2020 election.” It was done.

Judge Scott McAfee, who had good control of the courtroom, seemed to cede control to Willis as he rambled on about dating women, the value of hoarding cash and negotiating with foreign taxi drivers. was.

She is also accused of making out-of-court statements that undermined the case. Sound familiar?

For more FOX News opinions, click here

In Trump’s case, the judges repeatedly slapped him with contempt sanctions, punched his testimony and barred him from discussing certain defenses. He was fined for his remarks outside court.

For Willis, McAfee politely urged her to limit her answers and warned that the courts might have to intervene. He never did. Willis appeared to be in control of Tenor and her testimony until a clearly exhausted McAfee declared this was it.

Outside the courtroom, many on the left praised her confrontational and combative style. While Mr. Trump did not give in, Mr. Willis did not. Where Trump’s anger was a threat, Willis’s was righteous.

Trump isn’t the only thing that came to mind after Wade and Willis took their stand.

Judge intervenes as Georgia gives combative testimony about relationship with Trump prosecutors

Georgia prosecutors said Willis was involved in a discussion between Trump and Georgia election officials during what Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger described as settlement talks for Trump’s election fraud claims. relies heavily on recorded conversations with Trump had wanted a recount, but officials argued it was unlikely there would be enough votes to change the result. “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more vote than we got because we won the state,” Trump claimed.

Critics argue that Trump’s efforts to force officials to “find” votes were clearly pressuring them to fabricate votes. Trump claims he said there weren’t enough votes statewide to change the outcome.

In the end, critics dismiss other meanings of “find” as playful semantics.

But Mr. Wade and Mr. Willis had their own conflicts over keywords during Thursday’s hearing.

Wade was faced with the issue of giving seemingly false sworn statements during cross-examination related to a divorce case. For example, he was asked about his denial of “sexual relations, marriage and separation at the time” as of May 30, 2023, which seems clear. It has also been confirmed that she had a sexual relationship with Willis in at least 2022.

But Ms Wade claimed she interpreted the question to be limited to sexual relations “within marriage”. The fact that the question explicitly asked about sexual relationships before May 30, 2023 didn’t matter to the lead prosecutor in the Georgia election case.

Willis then proposed her own semantic interpretation. She was asked about local regulations prohibiting the payment or employment of her family or close friends. Willis declared that she viewed Wade as a contractor or “agent” rather than an employee.

Willis added another semantic twist when he was faced with another rule that prohibits accepting more than $100 in aggregate amounts from employees or contractors. Mr. Willis may have taken more than $100 from Mr. Wade, but he said it ended up paying off because he bought things for Mr. Wade. However, both men claimed that they had no receipts or records and that their transactions were primarily in cash.

Fulton County DA Fannie Willis (Getty Images)

Mr. Wade and Mr. Willis believe that these interpretations of the keywords are fair. However, another meaning of the word “find” is not only clearly unreasonable, but also grounds for prosecution.


None of this is likely to end the Georgia case. Even if Mr. Wade and Mr. Willis are disqualified, the court is likely to allow the case to proceed under their subordinates. Additionally, Willis may have succeeded in giving McAfee enough information to express his condemnation of her actions while refusing to disqualify her.

If so, the court would ignore the fact that both Wade and Willis are accused of making false statements not only in this week’s testimony but also in previous filings. It would allow prosecution of defendants in the Georgia case who were charged with making such false statements in filings in other cases.

After all, Willis knew his audience. She knew the judge would likely allow her to control her own testimony. She knew that many members of the public would consider her militant testimony justified, even inspiring. Most importantly, she knows she’s not Trump, and for many, that’s enough.

Click here to read more about Jonathan Turley



Sign up to stay informed to breaking news