Aww Yiss. Mothaflippin schadenfreude
“Most significant” fact is that Trump directed them to do the crimes. Their deal doesn’t really matter, their testimony will be damning.
Thoughts and prayers 🙏
Unless they renege? What would be the consequences?
You get resentenced by the judge for what you’ve pled guilty for and have a trial for what the prosecution withdrew.
Thank you. I knew about double jeopardy, I did not know the judge could resentence.
Part of the plea will be the agreed testimony. They have it on record and they cannot change that story on the stand without hanging themselves
If they’re threatened, they may be willing to take contempt charges and not testify.
On further research, I’m actually not sure that they can. More they can wait for the person to testify before they sentence. Once they rule, they no longer have jurisdiction unless it’s some sort of suspended sentence.
Let’s hope they are.
Lots of prison time.
deleted by creator
Clickbait title.
“To me, what’s most significant about both of these deals is that they are no jail deals. So one, Sidney Powell pleads guilty to some misdemeanors and Chesebro to a felony, but neither of them are serving jail. The only reason you would ever agree to that as a prosecutor is if they are providing evidence against higher ups,” Katyal, the former acting solicitor general of the United States during the Obama administration, said.
Note that the same crimes were committed in other states where they may not be offered the same deal. They both may end up doing time for election fraud, just not in Georgia.
Are those states likely to care about law and order in this particular instance?
Honest question.
I can’t answer your question directly but as I understand it there are several other states either considering or preparing cases concerning the fake electors scheme. Powell and chesebro’s submitted documents and testimony under oath in Georgia will be admissible in other states.
It’s not, though? The most significant fact is that despite misdemeanors and a felony, neither will serve any jail time. That’s consistent with the headline.
The title is clickbait because it doesn’t say what “the most significant fact” is. You have to click and go through 3 paragraphs of waffle to get to that.
It’s the first paragraph…?
Attorney Neal Katyal explained on Saturday that the “most significant” fact about Donald Trump’s ex-attorneys Kenneth Chesebro and Sidney Powell, who recently both pleaded guilty in the Georgia election interference case, is that they were both handed no jail deals.
Lol dunno how my eyes glossed over that.
The title is still clickbait, though.
You mean you have to read the article. Classically, that’s been how news articles work.
The title should be the briefest summary of the article, the article should have the detail. This title is lacking, intentionally so, to make sure you click. That is the very definition of clickbait. It’s far from the worst example of clickbait, but that’s still what it is.
No idea why I am engaging with you, but:
CLICKBAIT: It means what you think it means: bait for clicks. It’s a link which entices you to click on it. The “bait” comes in many shapes and sizes, but it is usually intentionally misleading and/or crassly provocative. Clicking will inevitably cause disappointment. Clickbait is usually created for money. The second main variety is headlines to media sites which make money from page views. Common offenders are Buzzfeed, and Gawker and its affiliated sites. The headlines are designed to cause maximum provocation or interest, but as a result are frequently extremely exaggerated or flat out lies, and the articles themselves are often just as shoddy.
This article did not cause disappointment, and the story was neither “exaggerated,” nor “flat out lies,” nor was it “shoddy.”
My advice is to reconsider how much time you are allowing for your brain to absorb information. I am well aware that you will not take my advice.
Causing disappointment is subjective. I found it disappointing, because it didn’t tell me anything I didn’t already know or that a reasonable person wouldn’t be able to figure out on their own. If the title had said it was because they were no jail plea deals I wouldn’t have bothered clicking.
Thank you for the explanation though. I would agree that it isn’t a strong example of clickbait, and frankly it would be hard to write a perfect title in this instance - but that’s mainly because it’s a pretty weak story. I’m just slightly irked by the way it’s written, as if to imply there was more substance.
His lawyers have tried to spin it with half truths. They said that the RICO indictment was “dismissed” as if there wasn’t enough evidence to support it, when all these guilty pleas do is actually make the RICO charges beyond a reasonable doubt. They prove the conspiracy, as one was hacking the voting machines while the other was putting forth false electors. It’s two major legs of the RICO case that have just been linked to Trump.
“Not news that he can spin” have you been in a coma the last 7 years
Seriously. He doesn’t need to spin. Spin is distorting the truth but keeping it plausible, if false. He will just brazenly lie, explicitly say America would be better off without certain judges and prosecutors (violating gag orders with no real consequences), his supporters will eat it up, some of them will try to harm these people, and he’ll sit back and act surprised, disinterested, or flat out say they deserved it. We have seen it over and over.
deleted by creator
