Sidney Powell may have pleaded guilty to interfering in the 2020 presidential election, but she still seems to think President Joe Biden’s victory was illegitimate.

On her social media accounts, Powell has continued to push claims that the 2020 election was rigged and that prosecutors in Georgia who brought the criminal case against her are politically motivated. The newsletter published by her dark money group has shared articles arguing Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis “extorted” her guilty plea.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    282 years ago

    So show evidence.

    You can’t. You just keep talking hoping Tangerine Scream will bail you out.

    He won’t. He can’t.

    Give up.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      30
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      When she gets to court she’ll have to give testimony consistent with the sworn statement she must have given to prosecutors as a part of the deal she got. If she contradicts it in her testimony in actual court, perjury, and indeed jail. So either she gives her damming testimony against trump accurately, or perjures herself and goes to jail, win win.

      She can lie all she wants in social media, but if she tries to pull this in court, yeah it’ll be jail.

      They should all be in prison though.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 years ago

        I do wonder if the defense can cross using her many countering media statements after pleading, to insert doubt in the jury.

        Seems like a smart play on her part, if she can’t be punished for public statements. She can honor the letter of the plea, but provide a mountain of countering public statements.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          162 years ago

          Would be easy for the prosecutor to counter though. All they would have to ask if the defense brought them up would be “Were those statements you made in public truthful?” If she lies and says yes, they have a sworn statement from her to the contrary already, so perjury, in addition to plea deal being off for not testifying truthfully. I can’t imagine prosecutors accepted a plea deal without a sworn statement with some sort of information valuable to the case including her admitting her role. I think the only smart play for her would be to slink into the shadows, testify truthfully when the trial comes, and distance herself from the whole debacle feeling lucky she got out with no jail time.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            Unsure. The MAGA players are true believers, and all of right-wing media will be pushing jury nullification by the time of the actual trial. Even if she follows the letter of the plea agreement, the introduction of countering statements by the defense could be enough to convince a nutty juror with nullification beaten into their head by Hannity and Facebook to pull the trigger in the jury room.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    292 years ago

    You either lied under oath or you are obviously grifting here. Give it up, you oatmeal with a wig on

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      82 years ago

      Not if that helps Trump and his higher-level conspirators. Their convictions are the most important.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        62 years ago

        She wouldn’t have pled out if she didn’t think she was gonna lose at trial. This is going to be catastrophic for trumpworld.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    122 years ago

    Is this part of their overall defense, that they didn’t “know” that Trump lost and they truly “believed” the election had been stolen? It feels like alot of what prosecutors are trying to prove is intent, that Trump actually knew he had lost. It just seems so silly though, like, “Oh, the President of the United States of America, who has access to the CIA, FBI, NSA, and who probably has more information available to him than any other human on Earth, was somehow so deluded that he didn’t actually know he had lost, even though there was absolutely no evidence to the contrary.”

    Why is it that ignorance is no excuse for everyone else who doesn’t have access to teams of legal experts, but somehow the head of the Executive branch is allowed to just not know that what they did was illegal and we have to jump through hoops to prove what they did or didn’t know at the time?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Why is it that ignorance is no excuse for everyone else who doesn’t have access to teams of legal experts, but somehow the head of the Executive branch is allowed to just not know that what they did was illegal and we have to jump through hoops to prove what they did or didn’t know at the time?

      You’re conflating things here. The law for fraud requires the intent to deceive to get what you want. If you believe that what you said was truthful, then it can’t be fraud. If you lied to get what you want, and then claimed that you didn’t know that was against the law, that would be “ignorance is no excuse for the law.” This is exactly why it’s a good legal strategy because, as you point out, its so hard to prove intent.

  • roguetrick
    link
    fedilink
    122 years ago

    To be clear, she did not make an Alford plea that the judge would’ve likely rejected. She was over a barrel and plead guilty and now wants everyone to ignore that.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      102 years ago

      If by “over the barrel” you mean there was overwhelming evidence against her that would’ve resulted in a trial going very poorly for her, yes. She was over a barrel and I love that for all the defendants.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    192 years ago

    She seems to have a lot of faith in the conservative media bubble, playing this both ways to different audiences.

    She’s probably right. Misinformation certainly works for them.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        2
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        That’s kind of what I was getting at. Tell the court the actual truth that’s corroborated by the evidence (hell, and PLEAD GUILTY), then tell the base whatever random shit they want to believe.

  • AutoTL;DRB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    62 years ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    She initially represented Trump, alongside Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis (who pleaded guilty on Monday), as part of the former president’s “Elite Strike Force” team of lawyers challenging his election loss.

    On Monday, she asked her followers to watch “Police State,” a new movie from conservative activist Dinesh D’Souza, which argues that law enforcement is biased against former President Donald Trump, who currently faces four pending criminal cases.

    Powell has also been promoting posts about the testimony of a witness in a separate, ongoing California disbarment trial for John Eastman, a co-defendant in the Atlanta criminal case and former Trump Justice Department official who sought to overturn the election results.

    The newsletter bolded a passage arguing she couldn’t get a fair trial with “a jury culled from deep-blue Fulton County” and pointing out that the misdemeanors she pleaded guilty to “would be discharged from Powell’s record following probation.”

    Ronald Carlson, a professor at the University of Georgia School of Law, told Insider that Powell’s comments are unusual for a cooperating witness, who is likely to be asked to testify on behalf of the prosecution at a trial.

    But in Monday’s newsletter, Defending the Republic shared a Truth Social post from Trump praising Powell’s “valiant job of representing a very unfairly treated and governmentally abused General Mike Flynn.”


    The original article contains 1,082 words, the summary contains 217 words. Saved 80%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    12
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    LOL, bc here in Murica, political violence is skyrocketing, and she’s got a huge target on her back for all the MAGA terrorists.

    Political violence rise here, and threats of violence to politicians is just one of the many parallels with the fall of the Weimar Republic.

  • Tangled Slinky
    link
    fedilink
    1352 years ago

    I hope she continues to fuck around. I don’t think she’s had nearly enough “find out” yet.

  • Grant_M
    link
    fedilink
    English
    232 years ago

    That’s not going to play out well for her. LMFAO

  • Nougat
    link
    fedilink
    402 years ago

    (D’Souza himself had previously pleaded guilty to making an illegal campaign contribution and was pardoned by Trump.)

    There it is. Trump gets to be president, he can accept “campaign contributions” in any amount from anyone anywhere, right out in the open - and then pardon the people who gave him the money.