Search Posts

A screenshot of a post from X (Twitter) by the account "GAGOP" (@GaRepublicans), the Georgia Republican Party's account, marked with a verified checkmark badge. The account's profile picture shows a red elephant graphic on a dark blue circular background. The post text praises "Chairman Emeritus" David Shafer for supporting Trump in 2020 and claims Fulton County DA Fani Willis pressured him to disavow Trump under threat of prosecution, and that he refused and prevailed. The post shows a timestamp and view count at the bottom, with an "X.com" logo in the top right corner.

Text in image: GAGOP ✓ @GaRepublicans Our Chairman Emeritus @DavidShafer stood up for President Trump in 2020. Fani Willis demanded that he repudiate the President & apologize for standing w/him. When he refused, she threatened him w/bankruptcy & life in prison. He never flinched, fought back, & won. Follow him. 6:21 PM · 2/16/26 · 48K Views

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

Fannie Willis having a pretty tough week. Friday, Loverboy was forced to quit the Trump Georgia case, and Fannie may not be far behind. Today, Trump's legal team appealed the Fannie Willis disqualification, taking it all the way to the Georgia Supreme Court. And then things got worse. Yesterday, during a different trial involving a RICO case, remember AOC, with a popular rap artist, her star witness showed up too high to testify. Man, can I get a water, son? I'm so high right now, y'all. I'm about to go to sleep on y'all, man. Fannie put that man on the stand, the alleged getaway driver during an armed robbery. That guy was her star witness. That was Fannie's star witness. And he's got a worse memory than Nathan Wade and Joe Biden combined. This has to be the jankiest jurisprudence south of the Mason-Dixon line we've ever seen.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

What do you think will happen in this case as it relates to her and what should happen in your view? Well, this case is disassembling in front of our eyes. This was a very basic error. This is a major case, but these prosecutors didn't put together the most basic narrative or facts that have to support these counts. The question is, what did the grand jury know? If it wasn't in the indictment, how did they vote out these crimes? What were they told as the basis? Because the judge just said, "You're not even telling the defendant what he needs to know to defend himself. I don't know what facts you're alleging here." Now, they could go back to the grand jury and get a superseding indictment, but that's going to take time. It's going to take time off the clock, and they might have a problem doing what is obviously their overriding purpose here, which is to try Donald Trump before the election. They could just go without these counts. The judge said, "I'll let you refer to the underlying conduct. I just won't let you use them as standalone crimes for these particular counts unless you go back to the grand jury."

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Joining me now, Caroline Levitt, who's the national press secretary for the Trump campaign. Caroline, what are the president's thoughts today about this hearing? Well, President Trump has long said that this Fannie Willis case is a sham. It has no legal basis, and it should be dismissed. And today, the entire world got to see that President Trump is 100% right. Even MSDNC, the legal analysts over there on Joe Biden's own propaganda network, admitted that Fannie Willis had a very bad day. But more importantly, Laura, Joe Biden had a very bad day because it's Joe Biden and his White House who are relying on these sham cases from Fulton County, Georgia to New York City to Washington, D.C., led by these far left Democrat district attorneys and prosecutors to take down his leading political opposition, and that is President Trump. If you look at all of these cases, they all have a few similarities. They're brought forth by far left district attorneys and prosecutors, but the timing is not coincidental. All of these people, Jack Smith, Fannie Willis, Alvin Bragg, have had years to prosecute President Trump if they really felt like he was truly a criminal. But guess what? They know that's not true. They are doing it to protect Joe Biden and remove President Trump's name off the ballot ahead of the next election because they know that Joe Biden did not beat him here in square of the ballot box. Did the president watch some of this today, Caroline? Did he watch any of this hearing? Our whole team watched this today along with the rest of the world. Yes, the president did share some of the most gasping moments on his Truth Social page. We'll continue to watch it. We'll continue to fight it. And we'll continue to make the case to the American people that this is a two tier system of justice. This is your tax dollars going towards prosecuting the former president who made your life better, secured our border, restored peace around this world, rebuilt the economy. But the thing is, Laura, the American people already know that. That's why when you saw President Trump's motorcade rolling through urban Atlantic to get his mug shot just a few months ago, you had Americans in minority, urban, impoverished communities on the streets yelling "free Trump" because they see this for what it is, the weaponization of our justice system. Caroline, there was a moment, yeah, there was a moment. Hold on, hold on, hold on. Yeah, I got you. Hold on, hold on. There weren't all cheerleaders on the other networks, and this is kind of predictable, but I'll get your reaction on the other side. Watch. This is explosive. Fani Willis is defiant. She is confrontational. And frankly, she is persuasive this afternoon. She is a very irritated liver. The fact that she herself feels as though she is being called to task and on trial. Well, that's Laura Coates over at CNN. And that was after Fani Willis kind of played the victim at one point saying, you know, I'm not the one who's, I'm not the one who's really on trial. Let's watch that. Don't let the legal ears fool you. This is epic. This is monumental. If things are going in the direction we think Fani Willis lied to the court, it's game over for her. She will be disqualified if they had a relationship prior to when they represented to the court. It's a huge deal. Like I can't overstate it. Yeah, that's the MSNBC one you were talking about. But she was actually, you know, trying to play the victim at one point. And we'll play that a little bit later on. But do you think that works? And in this case, what if they disqualify her and, of course, her friend, Nathan Wade, off the scene, but they disqualify maybe her office and then try to restart this investigation? What is your what is President Trump's view of this in light of calls for the governor's office to step in and essentially start their own criminal investigation or special investigation of this office? Well, as President Trump has long said, this case should be dismissed, not just because of these allegations of misconduct that if proven true, if the court of law proves them true, and they certainly appear to be that should be dismissed on the merits of that, but also on the basis of the law. This case has no legal grounding. Our legal team has been fighting that since the very beginning. Legal experts on both sides of the aisle absolutely agree the president did nothing wrong. He abided by the United States Constitution. And if we can't question elections in this country, then we don't have a question. We don't have a country at all. And so we agree wholeheartedly as we have since the beginning that this case should be dismissed no matter who is prosecuting it. But Fannie Willis certainly isn't qualified to be doing that.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

-I'm Laura Ingraham, and this is the Ingraham Angle tonight. As always, thank you for joining us. Fanny lines blurred. That's the focus of tonight's angle. Today, over several hours in an Atlanta courtroom, we saw why allowing a county DA to bring charges against a former U.S. president is absurd and destructive. Now, Fanny Willis is a leftist who thought that this case would catapult her to political fame, maybe even the Senate or Governor's mansion, because it would be Fanny, the Trump slayer. She was so full of herself, she thought no one would notice when she hired her married boyfriend as her lead Trump investigator. Now, just to refresh everyone on the timeline here, on New Year's Day 2021, Ms. Willis started as Fulton County DA, and then the next month, about 40 days later or so, February 10th, she opens the criminal investigation into the Trump election interference claim. And then, months later, by November 1st, she hires her friend, Nathan Wade, as a very special prosecutor. And then the next day, he files for divorce from his wife. Now, of course, Willis and Wade didn't expect that his divorce proceeding would become an issue in the Trump case. But at today's hearing, Judge Scott McAfee was considering whether the affair between the two created a conflict of interest that should knock them both off the case. Today, Nathan Wade took the stand on the question of who paid for their pleasure trips. -Did you take a trip with Ms. Willis in 2023 to Belize? -I did. -Did you take a trip to California with Ms. Willis in 2023? -I did. -Did you pay for those trips on that credit card? -I used the credit card to book the travel, but understand -- -She paid your back cash. -Well, let me say this. Let's take the Belize trip, for example, since you started there. That was a birthday gift to me, so I paid nothing for that trip -- zero. -Okay. So the charges that are on your card, she gave you cash for? -She did. -Okay. -Cash. Now, we're supposed to believe that Fannie Willis was carrying around those large amounts of cash. Of course, cash is not traceable. Now, when the DA unexpectedly appeared on the stand today, she did address this, or tried to. -I know he initially paid for it. Did you pay him back? -For the cruise and for Aruba. Yeah, I gave him his money before we ever went on that trip. -You gave him cash before you ever went on the trip? -Mm-hmm. -Later in the afternoon, Trump attorney Steve Sadow revisited the cash question. -I'm asking you whether or not those payments would be reflected on credit card bills of yours. -So, there was about $500 that I think is reflected on a debit card. My recollection is I took about $400 in cash with me today. -$400 or $4,000? -$4,000. -$400 or $4,000? And she answered $4,000. Now, who carries around that kind of cash? Well, Fannie does. Again, very convenient because you need a paper trail, right, to show that Willis did repay Mr. Wade and that she wasn't getting a financial benefit from the lawyer that she hired to investigate Trump. -Did you keep track of this cash that you paid him at all? -What do you talk -- I don't understand. -Did you keep track? Did you keep a ledger? Did you keep track of it? -So, I've only given him cash, as I mentioned, three or four times. There's no ledger. This is friends handing money off to each other. Of course, just friends handing money off to each other. This is ridiculous, just like the idea that Ms. Willis didn't know her ethical obligations as the county DA. -Did you disclose your relationship to anybody at Fulton County? -No, I don't think so. -Are you aware that Fulton County requires you to disclose any relationship with someone that you're doing business with? -I'm not aware. To me, that was stunning. Again, she's going after Trump for election interference. She doesn't even know her own ethical obligations. Now, but that was on top of many other stunning moments today where both witnesses appeared evasive and, at times, very argumentative, even belligerent, with glaring memory lapses about events that most people wouldn't easily forget. -How many times Mr. Wade visited you at the condo between the time you moved in and prior to November 1 of 2020? -I don't think often, but I don't want to speculate. -Can we say more than 5, more than 10? -Let's say more than 10, but I'm not sure that that's even accurate. -What about any other prosecutor that's involved in the prosecution of this case? -I don't think any of them have. -Yeah, because a personal residence is not a typical venue for official meetings between government lawyers. -I'm asking you whether or not prior to November 1 of 2021, there was a romantic relationship with Mr. Wade. That's very simple. It's either a yes or no. -I don't consider my relationship with him to be romantic before that. I'm not a handholder. -You didn't see the need, if I understand, to tell any of the people on the prosecution team when you had established a romantic relationship with Mr. Wade, that the lead prosecutor, that is the man that was basically giving orders to others, was dating or having a romantic relationship with you. -From at least 2020, me and Mr. Wade were friends. We were friends. We hung out. In November of 2021, I hired him. I do not consider our relationship to have become romantic until early of 2022. -The romantic relationship ended before the indictment was returned, yes or no? -To a man, yes. -To a man, yes. To you, no? -To a man, yes. What? Now, women across America are laughing because every woman I've ever met remembers vividly when a relationship starts. She said, "Well, it started between February and sometime in April." Bizarre. Now, of course, this all flies in the face of earlier testimony of a friend of Ms. Willis who was questioned about when this Willis-Wade relationship began. -Okay. So, you know that their relationship, their personal relationship, began shortly after this municipal court conference? -Yes. -And do you understand it, that their relationship began in 2019 and continued until the last time you spoke with her? -Yes. -What motive would her friend have to lie about Ms. Willis's relationship with the prosecutor? The prosecutor, of course, that she hired to go after Trump. It's unclear what motive she would have. But what is clear is that when Fanny gets in trouble, Fanny plays the victim. She stayed away, for the most part, from the race card today, except for a few moments like this. -Did you have contacts with Mr. Wade in 2020? -Very limited contact because Mr. Wade had a form of cancer that makes your allegations somewhat ridiculous. I'm not going to emasculate a black man. Did you understand that? -What? -Again, her first instinct is to deflect and then try to engender some type of, in this case, racial sympathy. There were lots of "poor me" moments. -So, let's be clear because you've lied in this. Let me tell you which one you lied in right here. I think you lied right here. No, no, no, no, no. This is the truth, Judge. It is a lie. It is a lie. Turned 50 in 2021. That's probably one of the worst birthdays I've ever had. -I ask you who knew? Answer and then explain this to us. -I am very private. It's like a woman doesn't have the right to keep her private life private. I don't need anybody to foot my bills. The only man who's ever foot my bills completely is my daddy. -Look, as wild as today's testimony was, and I was riveted by it long before we knew even who Nathan Wade was, it was obvious that the election interference case brought by this Fulton County DA was tainted. By charging Trump and 17 associates under a state racketeering statute, Willis showed us who she really was, a rogue prosecutor on a political mission to disqualify the GOP's leading candidate from the 2024 campaign. Now, even never-Trump legal experts have thrown water on Willis's case, questioning Trump's judgment. Okay, that's one thing, but portraying him with this state RICO statute as some type of mafia crime boss whose enterprise was subverting democracy, that is quite another. The Willis investigation was a political vendetta, and it was a travesty from the get-go. There are plenty of low-life radicals across the country who want Trump off the political scene, but they shouldn't have the power to prosecute and be paid by state taxpayers or have any power to interfere with the 2024 presidential election because that's election interference, and that's the angle.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Welcome into Rob Schmidt. Tonight I'm Rob Finnerty in for Rob on this Thursday evening and what a day it was in the state of Georgia. Not a good day for law fair against Donald Trump in New York, but particularly in the Georgia election case. Today we heard bombshell testimony that could disqualify Fulton County District Attorney Fannie Willis and her very special prosecutor Nathan Wade from the case. The testimony taking up the entire day in Fulton County and there are now clear questions about whether the case itself can move forward after what we heard today. Wade testified first for just about three hours starting in the morning and then along came Fannie. A very combative, agitated Fannie Willis. She took the stand to testify under oath that there was no conflict of interest in her decision to hire her boyfriend Nathan Wade to work as special prosecutor in a RICO case against former President Donald Trump even though he has zero criminal experience. Wade also claimed that he often accepted cash payments from other clients at his office. And these are the people that are prosecuting a former president. And all of this stems from a motion by Trump's co-defendant who wants both Wade and Willis taken off the case and the case dismissed. But take a listen to Fannie. So your office objected to us getting Delta records for flights that you may have taken with Mr. Wade. Well, no, no, no, I object to you getting records. You've been intrusive into people's personal lives. You're confused. You think I'm on trial. These people are on trial for trying to steal an election in 2020. I'm not on trial no matter how hard you try to put me on trial. You have no proof of any reimbursement for any of these things because it was all cash, right? The testimony of one witness is enough to prove a fact. So my question was, you have any proof? Are you telling me that I'm lying to you? Is that what you're intimating right here? I'm asking if you have any proof that you paid him any of the files. I mean, the proof is what I just told you. Has he ever visited you at the place you laid your head? So let's be clear because you've lied and this, this, let me tell you which one you lied in right here. I think you lied right here. No, no, no, no, this is the truth, Judge. It is a lie. It is a lie. Well, there's Fannie Willis. And one of the biggest bombshells today was related directly to the timeline. That's what this is all about, where Fannie and Nathan weighed together when she hired him because it's not illegal to have an affair or to run around with somebody in the office. It's frowned upon for sure, but it is a conflict of interest if you're a lawyer and you hire your inexperienced, unqualified boyfriend as special prosecutor and then pay him more than anyone else and take at least five vacations together over a seven month period on the taxpayer's dime. I don't know when these two found time to work, but Willis's close friend contradicted Wade Swarn's special statement that his relationship with Willis started in 2022 after he was hired. She claimed it started two years before that back in 2019 and that she saw them kissing and holding hands. But there was no special relationship, right? Take a listen. So, you know that their relationship, their personal relationship began shortly after this municipal court conference. Yes. When I ask you personal, do you take that to mean romantic? Yes. Do you understand it that their relationship began in 2019 and continued until the last time you spoke with her? Yes. Okay. So again, all of this is under oath. And today Nathan Wade admitted under oath that he paid for all of the vacations he took with Willis on his business credit card and was then reimbursed by Willis's office in cash. We're talking about thousands of dollars, which sounds normal, right? Hmm. And again, these are the people prosecuting the former president. You said in the affidavit that you roughly shared travel though, correct? Yes, ma'am. Okay. So this roughly sharing travel, you're saying she reimbursed you. She did. And where did you deposit the money she reimbursed you? Oh, it's cash. She didn't, she didn't give me any checks. So she paid you cash for her share of all these vacations. Mr. Shaffer, you'll step out if you do that again. Yes, ma'am. Okay. And so all of the vacations that she took, she paid you cash for. Yes, ma'am. And you purchased all of these vacations on your business credit card, correct? Yes, ma'am. So here's what it sounds like. It sounds like Fannie paid Willis over $600,000 and with that money, Fannie and Mr. Willis went on multiple fairy tale vacations between 2022 and 2023. Wade and Willis went on five trips that we know about, hotels, cruises in May 2023. It was wine country in Napa Valley, although Fannie is apparently a vodka drinker. He likes wine. I don't really like wine, to be honest with you. I like Grey Goose. I bought him a bottle of wine while we were there. In March of 2023, it was a trip to Belize for Mr. Wade's birthday, and let's not forget about the Caribbean cruise to the Bahamas and the New Year's trip to Aruba. I don't know how Fannie survived though, because when I think Caribbean, I think rum, not vodka. And we all know this because all of the receipts are right there for everyone to see in the court filings. The question now, how do they stay on the case? The last time I checked, if you lie on the stand, if you shoot from the hip, if you play fast and loose with the truth, that's perjury, and they were juggling fireballs at best today in Georgia. At worst, they perjured themselves. And if they had a financial interest in keeping the Trump gravy train case running, they're both in a whole lot of trouble, disbarment territory. So today was a good day in the Trump legal world, maybe the best we've seen yet. Even the MSNBC legal analysts seem to agree. Don't let the legal ears fool you. This is epic. This is monumental. If things are going in the direction we think Fannie Willis lied to the court, it's a game over for her. She will be disqualified. It might be appropriate for Ms. Willis to consider removing herself from this case now and turning the reins over to a senior official in the district attorney's office and let him or her handle it, because this is getting ugly and it's getting messy. And my guess is it's not going to get better. So what comes next? It's hard to say, but these are the people, again, that are prosecuting a former president. And four Trump cases could become three Trump cases sooner than expected.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

these developments. Trump's legal spokeswoman Alina Haber is with us. Alina your reaction to that. My reaction is probably like most human beings with any decency and soul to joke about an assassination of a former president and leading candidate is deranged. It's sick and it should be handled appropriately as it goes to Fannie Willis. I just if those allegations are true Sean and I have a lot to say about this. That is so disturbing on so many levels. Number one for the constituents of the state of Georgia that your taxpayer dollars are subsidizing her boyfriend who is now teamed up with her to persecute and prosecute Trump for the American people that when I thought we really couldn't get any lower when I thought we really couldn't attack him anymore with literally no self-respect and dignity we have this. We have a woman who's now bringing in quadruple ten times what she's making whatever the number is and then vacationing on taxpayer dollars and then in their spare time talking about going after Trump you know you shared the very devastating news Sean about Melania's mom and I have had the pleasure of meeting her and her husband and I think we all have to remember as human beings as Americans Democrats Republicans this is a human being and we all have family and when you lose a loved one you are still a person and I think the American people forget that Donald Trump is a person with a family who is fighting the fight but also has real life happening and I would just like to remind everybody to hug everyone and that you love and send my condolences to the Trump family tonight. A lot of people like to speculate you know about well maybe she's not at this event or that event my understanding is she's been personally taking care of her mom for a long period of time now just she's been doing it quietly and and she's a private person and she'd ever write to do so but back to this issue so that's right so so here you have it sounds like that the DA's office in Georgia they're hiring outside counsel they're paying them outside counsel fees and as a result that is funding a lifestyle that benefits in this case the district attorney that's going after Donald Trump I would imagine that on some level that she's compromised what does that mean for you know the quote RICO case which I never quite understood. It's unbelievable I've always said it Sean I know you've said it they'll accuse him of the things they are doing themselves and that is the case right here it's a perfect example it says it all if this is true if she really was using taxpayer dollars to funnel vacations and then go after Trump completely disregarding ethics completely prosecuting it's called selective prosecution you are going after someone as a target and then teaming up with your friends the only RICO I see is the RICO with the DA's and AG's that is happening the conspiracy is not a conspiracy at all we have Soros backed and other funders that we've seen that are backing these individuals and they are coordinating they are profiting and they are becoming famous and politically their agenda is all the same get Trump that is the only RICO case I see here that is the only RICO case the facts are to the truth Donald Trump has done nothing wrong and they have intentionally done this and waiting to interfere with an election because they can't beat him in the polls. What about the issue of the immunity case going before three judge panel arguments held earlier today at times based on reports I read it almost seemed to go off the rails asking what if the president instructs SEAL team six to kill innocent people you know would the president be acting in his capacity as the president of the United States would they have immunity that seemed to go off the rails I understand two of the three judges a three judge panel were Biden appointed judges that's that's correct I've actually been in front of a judge in New York and been asked the same question on the Michael Cohen case I won that case on immunity it's hypotheticals that do not currently exist because the real facts are so easy to win that we have to now argue the slippery slope argument of if he kills someone will be held accountable he didn't kill anyone he didn't cause an insurrection he didn't get charged for it but they're using hypotheticals to frighten America this is a slam dunk case he should have him absolute immunity and presidential immunity you know it was Ted Cruz who said earlier in the show democracy and jeopardy that's that's Joe Biden's big campaign slogan but they're the people that don't want Donald Trump to even be on the ticket citing insurrection which he's never been charged with makes no sense Alina thank you

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.