Another interpretation of Sanusi's explanation raised suspicion of corruption and abuse of power similar to the case against Muhyiddin involving Bokhary Equities donation to PPBM, as below:
Adding to the confusion is the bit about Tulangi requesting the return of RM1.3 million instead of the whole RM5 million.
Some details would be nice because apparently a reliable source said there was no flow of money into KFA account to show the donated money went to KFA. This contradict Sanusi's claim the money is all in the account.
Sanusi mentioned in his press statement about the RM5 million received was to pay debt. So which is which:
Money in the KFA account used to pay debt or KFA could only afford to repay RM1.3 million because money never went into the account?
