649
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2023
649 points (98.7% liked)
politics
19072 readers
4206 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Well the article does say
"A judge agreed that she will serve about six years of probation, have to pay $2,700 in restitution and have to testify truthfully against her co-defendants."
So yes
$2700 for a lawyer lol, these numbers are so random
Yeah but she was Trump's lawyer so I assume she is broke and unemployable.
/S sort of
35% of the county would totally hire her.
Well, not now, she's turned on the God-Emperor.
This. I think her law career is over.
I can't imagine what job she'd do now. Or maybe I am wrong and there are still people who'd hire her.
I'd imagine this would probably put her on the chopping block for disbarment
Newsmax, OANN
Don't forget OnlyFans
Can we pay her to keep her clothes on
Ew
I bet she's a freak in bed.
Cool man. You finally made a comment that made me conjure an image that was so gross that I had to cleanse my palate by reading something more wholesome. I chose your username.
I don't see them wanting her if she turned on Trump. MAGA people will spit after they say her name to get the taste out of their mouth now.
lol @ thinking the average MAGA chud can afford to hire a lawyer. Also, you forgot the R in country.
On NPR, they state that the $2700 covers the cost of replacing election equipment.
https://www.npr.org/2023/10/19/1207076719/sidney-powell-georgia-guilty-plea
Oh they just expected the truth later from a trump toady for an immediate legal benefit. So wise.
Part of her deal was a written statement describing what she will testify to. They don't give this kind of deal unless the subject has already provided sufficient useful information and sworn to its truthfulness. She's bound to her statement now and, if she retracts later, I'm sure they can both pull back the plea deal and charge her with perjury.
These prosecutors aren't stupid nor is this their first plea deal. They've already got the goods.
Oh they will absolutely bring the hammer down if she doesn't do and say everything by the book from this point forward, that's the point of a plea deal. It gets the defendant out of (most of the) trouble, but it locks them in to testifying fully and truthfully about the case from then on. If the prosecutor/judge thinks they aren't holding up that promise, the deal is taken away. You really do have to go full state's evidence if you take a deal like this, and they are not playing around with the threat of piling all those felony charges - and more - right back on you if you don't sing just the way the DOJ wants you to.