Jenna is remorseful only because she was caught, indicted and doesn't have the financial backing for huge legal bills. She knowingly lied and didn't care about the consequences until they bit her on the butt.
Elizabeth Ellis: Isn't it a bit like Trump. "I was elected; I was elected; I could not have lost to sleepy Joe; The election was a steal; I was elected; I was elected. I am among the most innocent and honest of American citizens in history. It was rigged. It is a witch hunt. I was elected . . ."
Meanwhile, the Orange Carnival-Barker got fined another $10,000.00 for contempt of court, a monetary amount that is supposed to be trivial in his non-existent "billions".
And the "Christian" Lawyer (isn't that an oxymoron? -- I can say that, as I am a lawyer) . . . believes the Orange Snout-Face because he crossed the street to hold a Bible, sometimes upside down, to show to the video camera, as he (comically) gave "The Good Book" a thumbs up.
Now that surely did it for the fundamentalist hordes.
They're crocodile tears. Its like when I would catch my daughter doing something and she would cry, not because she regretted what she did, but she was unhappy when she was caught.
Joyce, thanks for clearing this up. I was watching the beginning segment of Nicole Wallace today when she went to breaking news about Meadows. It has been a long time since I have watched anything on ABC, or CBS. Only a segment or two (block?) of Nicole and all of Lawrence O'Donnell--when he happens to be on. Then I patiently wait for you and HCR to post, to explain things to me, and Robert Hubble to calm me down later. That's all anymore. I have a WAPO subscription but almost never use it.
By the way, YOU are one of the over-the-top Special Lawyers! Must be the chickens....
I certainly understand. I am so burned out that I was just going to go to bed and not write anything, Heather makes the sense out of it all and Joyce helps me keep my head on straight.
I quit watching news. I hate ads. I too read Joyce and HCR. I add to it Jay Kuo. Between the three I think I get ALL I need. I do understand more than watching by reading. I’ll check out Hubble. Thanks.
Robert Hubbell - he's an excellent complement to the others noted here. I'd also recommend Lucian Truscott and TCinLA if you can afford that many subscriptions. However, all are free to read, you just won't be able to comment. Read then decide.
You still have to see the GD Chyrons, I am so over seing them. Their adds are another thing altogether, proof positive that all MSM will do anything for money. I time shift everything using YouTube TV, and they are still a royal pain. This is where I get my news now.
Jan, you will like Hubble. Very down to earth, but very literate. Makes me think, even if I disagree with him once in a while.
Tip: I ditched Dish almost a year ago--maybe longer. Got along fine without the tube, but then everything started to pick up speed in the world. I subscribed to YouTube TV, about the same price. It's a little clunky but manageable.
What I do is record the 2 shows that I want to at least sample, then wait about 20 minutes after each one starts and tune in. This let's me fast forward through the ads. I hate them too!
I was driving during the Powell Chesebro news so i found MSNBC on XM for the first time (usually 60s rock for me.) i was amused that their biggest advertiser was California Psychics, offering readings for relationship advice-- “It’s life-changing or it’s free.” I wonder if the House Republicans eventually consulted them.
You have just explained how I view the news, with the exception of omitting Nicole Wallace. Ditto the WAPO. I value Substack, and keep up to date with honest explanations through it.
Celeste, Nicole is not hard to look at, which very slightly dulls the pain of what she is reporting. It's a male thing, sorry. Plus, she has great guests, and let's them speak. So many other anchors interrupt their guests, (or did, back when I watched a lot more TV) which begs the question, what did they even bring them on the show for?
Lawrence O'Donnell is a crazy Irishman like me, but with a lot more brain power. (O'Hara)
I watch Nicolle Wallace ( sometimes just second hour ) and Ari Melber, who I think is a must-see. Extra treat to see Joyce on, also Barbara McQuade. MSNBC laps the field on legal commentary--it’s the prosecutorial experience. Also on other shows and i sometimes think how tired they must be. Sometimes watch later but usually asleep by ODonnell and watch him next day online.
Two days prior to Jenna’s plea deal, she was still posting about the election being stolen and it being fraudulent. I also call BS on her claiming “that she depended on senior attorneys”. That claim is as fake as her eyelashes and tears of remorse. I agree with Capital Police Officer Harry Dunn when he states that the hitman goes to prison, but the guy who hires the hitman goes free. These people appear to be getting off with a slap on the wrist. And the fact that they get to keep their law licenses is a crime in and of itself. I feel like I’m participating in a game show called the Biggest Loser, and sadly I’m winning.
Obviously, I don’t know the details BUT it confounds me to read that these bogus attorneys could continue to retain their law license. I’d like to think, at a minimum they won’t find potential clients beating a path to their doors.
Other than that I don’t comprehend why people who enabled TFG to put so much of this country’s democracy and constitutional law and order on the line should be able to retain a license to continue practicing in the United States of America. In fact, their role certainly suggests much worse than enabling behavior, more like active co-defendants in a most egregious moment in our country’s current history.
She was homeschooled and is very “Christian”. That she invoked that nonsense in her plea tells you she believes devoutly all she has to do is say she’s sorry and she gets a free pass to heaven.
I used to work for a guy who’d pray ostentatiously when at lunch w a customer, then told me he’d taken his daughter and family out to dinner when in town, and put me on the expense report. “You lie and I swear to it?” Very devout
It's up to the state bars (and federal bars) where they are registered. Giuliani is currently suspended, there's been a state bar hearing in CA on John Eastman, and Jenna got a slap on the wrist in CO. I believe that there is no ruling on Eastman, or I would have heard of it.
"The 65 Project, named after the 65 lawsuits filed to overturn the 2020 election results, has already filed 10 ethics complaints and will air advertisements in contentious states as part of the plan, which was first reported by Axios."
Yes, she was quite the painter. Should have been an artist? The eyelashes were a good match for the tall, black standing deads after a huge forest fire.
There is something about this ABC Meadows thing that feels squirrelly.. I find it hard to believe Smith would give Meadows immunity to go before a Grand Jury without a cooperation agreement.. It just seems too bush league for a guy like Smith..Considering who Meadows is to Trump..And the severity of the case..
I doubt the leak came from Jack Smith's side. More likely from Meadows side, which takes you down the road that this is information that Meadows wants to communicate to his co-indictees. There were two "markers" in particular that seemed odd to me. Meadows says that he never heard Trump admit that he lost [but Cassidy did!], and that Trump was "visibly shaken" that someone he didn't know got shot [Trump wouldn't care]. And surely not true that the most keen interest of the questioners was whether Mark believed what he wrote in his book. Really? Not about the role of Roger Stone, the planning for the Jan 6th riot, the intent of the fake elector conspiracy,.... All just seems like what a defense lawyer would like to release: admit to facts that everyone already knows and imply that there is nothing else to see here.
Hi Sam, I disagree with your idea that Mark had a cooperation agreement before testifying at the Washington DC Grand Jury. Jack Smith came to Washington in January 2023 and immediately subpoenaed Mark Meadows to testify and bring communications records to the Grand Jury. Why would Smith give him immunity before he even knew what he had so far as documentation? That would be like paying the contractor in before the house was built. My guess is that Mark started negotiating a plea deal after he testified to the Grand Jury. I don’t think he had any kind of immunity when he went to the grand jury. Testifying without immunity is not mutually exclusive to gaining a plea deal later with Jack Smith after Mark testified to the grand jury. It’s conceivable that Jack Smith found out how much communication Mark Meadows had via the text messages, and he wants to triangulate that via testimony in a trial. So to me, it’s quite plausible that he worked a deal with Mark after the grand jury testimony occurred, such as “Testify against Trump and you won’t go to jail.” Documents are great, but it’s even stronger to have his testimony (for a jury trial,). But lawyers here can always refuted my opinion. Following Mark’s testimony to the grand jury, Jack Smith subpoenaed trump’s records. So he used Mark’s testimony at the grand jury to go after Trump. And he’s going to use Mark in the court trial as a witness.
Also, Fani Willis, he is there Washington DC, grand jury testimony, to make her indictment, including that of Meadows. Why would he have a ommunity Wes Jack, Smith and not Fani Willis? The only way that could happen is if his attorney didn’t dot that i but Fani was gearing up to file for as long as Jack Smith was on board. It wasn’t any secret at all. How could any attorney miss that and cover his client on one case and leave him exposed on another?
Finally, who says ABC is any kind of definitive source?
I was just wondering whether he had some immunity from a different government branch that helped him to avoid the charges. So, you are saying that cannot be the case. Thanks.
If a person receives immunity (and we don't know for sure that Meadows did), it isn't a blanket immunity but applies only to the specific prosecutor's case.
When you say that Smith wouldn't know what Meadows' testimony would be, that is not completely the case. Usually the defendant will give a "proffer" of what he would testify about if he has immunity. That proffer cannot be used against the defendant.
Meadows partially cooperated with Ja 6 committee and provided some documents. Not to mention Cassidy Hutchinson’s accounts of his activities. He is not an unknown quantity.
My remarks may have sounded a bit cart before the horse, and I realize Smith can’t know what path to take without knowing what Meadows will say..But I find it odd to give a potential witness Use or Transactional Immunity if there is not a cooperation agreement in place..Reporting has Meadows sitting before the Grand Jury several times.. have to wonder at what point a cooperation agreement would have been obtained by Smith..Certainly before Fani Willis dropped her indictment..
Yes, prior to Fani Willis’ indictment. My guess is the minute he left the DC Grand Jury post testimony, he and his attorney contacted Jack Smith. Jack Smith hit pay dirt with him. But Fani didn’t give a royal. He had no protection from her. There are bright minds criminal legal on this site - hoping Bryan and others weigh in on our conjecturing. I’m conjuring you are correct about Mark’s insider-insider agreement with Jack Smith. But when? Joyce will have to give us the legal on that. She was with DOJ!!
Yes, I am somewhat pleased with today's outcome with respect for the Ellis deal & maybe the Meadows news or non-news, as the case may be. I think Meadows is a bum, a traitor to the nation, but then I haven't liked him for a long time, all the way back to when he registered to vote in a state he didn't live in, a mobile home he didn't own was what he falsely used for that purpose of casting his ballot there. If a Democrat had done that, he/she would be in their 3rd yr of prison, but NOPE, not for any Republican, nope, not ever. Proves the law is fickle..... He wrote a book FIRST about his adventures in trump land. But, wouldn't testify b4 the J6 Committee. He's a rat. I don't trust him as far as I could toss him. I wouldn't spit on him if he was ablaze either. But, I digress. The dominoes are starting to fall, and that is something for now. My big question is: when will Jack Smith ask Judge Canon to be replaced? Carry on.
Ellis is a phoney. Check her FB page. Spewing falsehoods up until yesterday. She is only sorry she got caught. She will try not to be helpful. She should be in jail. Same is true for Meadows.
Oh please, the fainting couch is over that way ... I don't think this forum needs ultra snowflakes. I totally agree that her "white woman" tears were totally privilege on show.
Ouch! Certainly the “privilege” part is on display. Why not just leave it there. We are all unimpressed by these folks who are nearly three years later facing some accountability?. (Counting from November 2020 until now.)
Thank you, Joyce. I am not impressed with Jenna Ellis either as a person or a lawyer. I hope she testifies truthfully but will not be surprised if she slips in a word or two in defense of Trump. From everything I've read about her, she is mostly outraged at having been charged with all the felonies and lies she committed, then having the trump team refuse to pay for her defense.
Mark Meadows on thew other hand has way more to tell about Trump's role and knowledge of the treasonous insurrection and damage to OUR Capitol Building, it is not any political parties' building it belongs to us. Just as the White House and all other Federal Buildings belong to us. If Meadows testifies truthfully in any of the three trials directly linked to Trump's treasonous behavior we can heave a sigh of relief as the ugly orange bag of blubber is hauled off to spend the rest of his sordid life in prison. {And, yes I am resorting to name calling like any 8th grader.]
We are in this together but Mark Meadows is not with us. He is out on a limb and hung out to dry. Serves him right for being a manically arrogant a-hole. And a traitor to American democracy that millions gave their lives to preserve. May he live in abject shame in perpetuity, plus one day.
Thank you Joyce for all of your hard work to keep us informed. I’m not sure I believe Mark Meadows’ attorney. I think he has made a deal of some kind with Jack Smith and is keeping it very quiet. If he was never one of the unnamed co-conspirators, he may just be a protected, uncharged witness. And he is trading testimony for protection.
Trump reminds me of the orange toad sitting in a saucepan full of water. The heat is increasing slowly and it does notice anything until it's thouroughly cooked. And ready to serve... lol
Fake Tears Jenna should be serving jail time, as should the others who pled guilty and cooperated with Prosecutors Roto avoid doing so. How they got off without serving a day is mind blowing. Unfortunately, this is how the system works in white American.
"How they got off without serving a day is mind blowing."
Three reasons I reckon: (a) they're white and white collar, so privileged (b) they are lawyers, and fellow lawyers (even prosecutors) give them huge amounts of slack and deference, and (c) they are really really after Trump and Giuliani, and will do ANYTHING in terms of deals with lesser mortals to get to the light on the hill. I would too, I reckon.
Fani is only after The Don ... everybody else can get off.
They have been made to supply testimony in advance that can be used to guide their future testimony in court AND be a check on any future "forgotten details and facts".....
Jenna is remorseful only because she was caught, indicted and doesn't have the financial backing for huge legal bills. She knowingly lied and didn't care about the consequences until they bit her on the butt.
Yes, her calculation was I have no money for 1/2 million dollar legal fees and 5-20 yrs in a Georgia prison does not sound good..
Remorseful my ass..
Patricia Jaeger: Quite right.
And let's not forget, Jenna Ellis is a "Christian" Lawyer.
It must be true. She says so.
(NB: The last sentence was highly ironic.)
She says so in seemingly every sentence she utters. I'm no expert, but those that are loudest are usually full of it.
If someone has to constantly tell you that they are a Christian, they likely aren’t.
Elizabeth Ellis: Isn't it a bit like Trump. "I was elected; I was elected; I could not have lost to sleepy Joe; The election was a steal; I was elected; I was elected. I am among the most innocent and honest of American citizens in history. It was rigged. It is a witch hunt. I was elected . . ."
Dean Gavney: I think you hit the nub of it.
Meanwhile, the Orange Carnival-Barker got fined another $10,000.00 for contempt of court, a monetary amount that is supposed to be trivial in his non-existent "billions".
And the "Christian" Lawyer (isn't that an oxymoron? -- I can say that, as I am a lawyer) . . . believes the Orange Snout-Face because he crossed the street to hold a Bible, sometimes upside down, to show to the video camera, as he (comically) gave "The Good Book" a thumbs up.
Now that surely did it for the fundamentalist hordes.
She's the kid that got caught with her hand in the cookie jar.
At 39
She was less than remorseful about her deal with the CO State Bar and said she admitted what she did just so the case would go away.
What do her tears reveal?
They're crocodile tears. Its like when I would catch my daughter doing something and she would cry, not because she regretted what she did, but she was unhappy when she was caught.
That she’s willing to say or do anything in her own self- interest. No moral compass. Pathetic.
An additional "like" for the word "butt."
Fame and fortune isn’t always what it’s cut out to be.
When Jenna read her statement, I was reminded of Tammy Faye Baker.
I agree ... Thank You !!
I dimly recall it was Jim Bakker who did all the BIG crying! Perhaps Tammy was right onto it as well!
I remember her makeup running.
Will Giuliani's hair dye run again when she testifies against him? It's got to be terrifying right now for "America's Mayor."
Yup. He likely sees the writing on the wall.
https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-e19af5bec6bedb2668f76f53ff8553c6-lq
Yes exactly, for those of us old enough to remember who Tammy Fay "Pass The Loot" Baker is.
Where is my laugh emoji?
LOL! I Remember !!! I still can’t stand to hear their names
Great comparison!
Joyce, thanks for clearing this up. I was watching the beginning segment of Nicole Wallace today when she went to breaking news about Meadows. It has been a long time since I have watched anything on ABC, or CBS. Only a segment or two (block?) of Nicole and all of Lawrence O'Donnell--when he happens to be on. Then I patiently wait for you and HCR to post, to explain things to me, and Robert Hubble to calm me down later. That's all anymore. I have a WAPO subscription but almost never use it.
By the way, YOU are one of the over-the-top Special Lawyers! Must be the chickens....
I certainly understand. I am so burned out that I was just going to go to bed and not write anything, Heather makes the sense out of it all and Joyce helps me keep my head on straight.
As always, I'm pullin' for the pullets.
Ransom, I understand.
I'm pullin' for 'em too....
I quit watching news. I hate ads. I too read Joyce and HCR. I add to it Jay Kuo. Between the three I think I get ALL I need. I do understand more than watching by reading. I’ll check out Hubble. Thanks.
Robert Hubbell - he's an excellent complement to the others noted here. I'd also recommend Lucian Truscott and TCinLA if you can afford that many subscriptions. However, all are free to read, you just won't be able to comment. Read then decide.
If you want to watch MSNBC without adds they are available on podcasts.
You still have to see the GD Chyrons, I am so over seing them. Their adds are another thing altogether, proof positive that all MSM will do anything for money. I time shift everything using YouTube TV, and they are still a royal pain. This is where I get my news now.
Dick, me too. Then I turn it off....
Jan, you will like Hubble. Very down to earth, but very literate. Makes me think, even if I disagree with him once in a while.
Tip: I ditched Dish almost a year ago--maybe longer. Got along fine without the tube, but then everything started to pick up speed in the world. I subscribed to YouTube TV, about the same price. It's a little clunky but manageable.
What I do is record the 2 shows that I want to at least sample, then wait about 20 minutes after each one starts and tune in. This let's me fast forward through the ads. I hate them too!
Thanks for your 'like' and reply. Blessings!
I was driving during the Powell Chesebro news so i found MSNBC on XM for the first time (usually 60s rock for me.) i was amused that their biggest advertiser was California Psychics, offering readings for relationship advice-- “It’s life-changing or it’s free.” I wonder if the House Republicans eventually consulted them.
You have just explained how I view the news, with the exception of omitting Nicole Wallace. Ditto the WAPO. I value Substack, and keep up to date with honest explanations through it.
Celeste, Nicole is not hard to look at, which very slightly dulls the pain of what she is reporting. It's a male thing, sorry. Plus, she has great guests, and let's them speak. So many other anchors interrupt their guests, (or did, back when I watched a lot more TV) which begs the question, what did they even bring them on the show for?
Lawrence O'Donnell is a crazy Irishman like me, but with a lot more brain power. (O'Hara)
Blessings!
I watch Nicolle Wallace ( sometimes just second hour ) and Ari Melber, who I think is a must-see. Extra treat to see Joyce on, also Barbara McQuade. MSNBC laps the field on legal commentary--it’s the prosecutorial experience. Also on other shows and i sometimes think how tired they must be. Sometimes watch later but usually asleep by ODonnell and watch him next day online.
Two days prior to Jenna’s plea deal, she was still posting about the election being stolen and it being fraudulent. I also call BS on her claiming “that she depended on senior attorneys”. That claim is as fake as her eyelashes and tears of remorse. I agree with Capital Police Officer Harry Dunn when he states that the hitman goes to prison, but the guy who hires the hitman goes free. These people appear to be getting off with a slap on the wrist. And the fact that they get to keep their law licenses is a crime in and of itself. I feel like I’m participating in a game show called the Biggest Loser, and sadly I’m winning.
Obviously, I don’t know the details BUT it confounds me to read that these bogus attorneys could continue to retain their law license. I’d like to think, at a minimum they won’t find potential clients beating a path to their doors.
Other than that I don’t comprehend why people who enabled TFG to put so much of this country’s democracy and constitutional law and order on the line should be able to retain a license to continue practicing in the United States of America. In fact, their role certainly suggests much worse than enabling behavior, more like active co-defendants in a most egregious moment in our country’s current history.
She was homeschooled and is very “Christian”. That she invoked that nonsense in her plea tells you she believes devoutly all she has to do is say she’s sorry and she gets a free pass to heaven.
She may have to buy a few indulgences to stay out of purgatory, though.
You’re a lot more literate on the subject than I.
I used to work for a guy who’d pray ostentatiously when at lunch w a customer, then told me he’d taken his daughter and family out to dinner when in town, and put me on the expense report. “You lie and I swear to it?” Very devout
Does anyone really believe that at the end of the day any of these people will ever practice law again? I can hear it now..
“Elise.. Elise..Jenna Elise? From the Trump overthrow trials? No thanks I’ll get a public defender..
She won't be able to represent the Lollipop Guild.
Nor the Good Ship Lollipop.
They are all likely to be disbarred.
Do they really get to keep their law licenses?
It's up to the state bars (and federal bars) where they are registered. Giuliani is currently suspended, there's been a state bar hearing in CA on John Eastman, and Jenna got a slap on the wrist in CO. I believe that there is no ruling on Eastman, or I would have heard of it.
Interesting and disturbing! Thanks for the info.
It takes a village:
"The 65 Project, named after the 65 lawsuits filed to overturn the 2020 election results, has already filed 10 ethics complaints and will air advertisements in contentious states as part of the plan, which was first reported by Axios."
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/597163-group-trying-to-disbar-lawyers-who-worked-on-trumps-post-election/
Tammy Faye had eyelashes!
And Jim had serial shags on the side.
And mascara; lots of mascara
Yes, she was quite the painter. Should have been an artist? The eyelashes were a good match for the tall, black standing deads after a huge forest fire.
The first thing I thought of watching her humiliate herself was she's wearing really fake eyelashes!?!? I couldn't even concentrate on her fake words.
There is something about this ABC Meadows thing that feels squirrelly.. I find it hard to believe Smith would give Meadows immunity to go before a Grand Jury without a cooperation agreement.. It just seems too bush league for a guy like Smith..Considering who Meadows is to Trump..And the severity of the case..
I doubt the leak came from Jack Smith's side. More likely from Meadows side, which takes you down the road that this is information that Meadows wants to communicate to his co-indictees. There were two "markers" in particular that seemed odd to me. Meadows says that he never heard Trump admit that he lost [but Cassidy did!], and that Trump was "visibly shaken" that someone he didn't know got shot [Trump wouldn't care]. And surely not true that the most keen interest of the questioners was whether Mark believed what he wrote in his book. Really? Not about the role of Roger Stone, the planning for the Jan 6th riot, the intent of the fake elector conspiracy,.... All just seems like what a defense lawyer would like to release: admit to facts that everyone already knows and imply that there is nothing else to see here.
Who was it that Trump said, “something to the effect of”
we can’t let them know we lost. It’s embarrassing. Inthoight that was Meadows.
I think Cassidy testified that Meadows said that Trump said that to him.
Hi Sam, I disagree with your idea that Mark had a cooperation agreement before testifying at the Washington DC Grand Jury. Jack Smith came to Washington in January 2023 and immediately subpoenaed Mark Meadows to testify and bring communications records to the Grand Jury. Why would Smith give him immunity before he even knew what he had so far as documentation? That would be like paying the contractor in before the house was built. My guess is that Mark started negotiating a plea deal after he testified to the Grand Jury. I don’t think he had any kind of immunity when he went to the grand jury. Testifying without immunity is not mutually exclusive to gaining a plea deal later with Jack Smith after Mark testified to the grand jury. It’s conceivable that Jack Smith found out how much communication Mark Meadows had via the text messages, and he wants to triangulate that via testimony in a trial. So to me, it’s quite plausible that he worked a deal with Mark after the grand jury testimony occurred, such as “Testify against Trump and you won’t go to jail.” Documents are great, but it’s even stronger to have his testimony (for a jury trial,). But lawyers here can always refuted my opinion. Following Mark’s testimony to the grand jury, Jack Smith subpoenaed trump’s records. So he used Mark’s testimony at the grand jury to go after Trump. And he’s going to use Mark in the court trial as a witness.
Also, Fani Willis, he is there Washington DC, grand jury testimony, to make her indictment, including that of Meadows. Why would he have a ommunity Wes Jack, Smith and not Fani Willis? The only way that could happen is if his attorney didn’t dot that i but Fani was gearing up to file for as long as Jack Smith was on board. It wasn’t any secret at all. How could any attorney miss that and cover his client on one case and leave him exposed on another?
Finally, who says ABC is any kind of definitive source?
Is it possible that Mark Meadows is a confidential informant and that is why he is looking so strange?
In criminal court cases, there are no confidential informants. But there are unindicted co-conspirators.
I was just wondering whether he had some immunity from a different government branch that helped him to avoid the charges. So, you are saying that cannot be the case. Thanks.
If a person receives immunity (and we don't know for sure that Meadows did), it isn't a blanket immunity but applies only to the specific prosecutor's case.
When you say that Smith wouldn't know what Meadows' testimony would be, that is not completely the case. Usually the defendant will give a "proffer" of what he would testify about if he has immunity. That proffer cannot be used against the defendant.
Meadows partially cooperated with Ja 6 committee and provided some documents. Not to mention Cassidy Hutchinson’s accounts of his activities. He is not an unknown quantity.
Her accounts are particularly damning. While I don't agree with most of her politics, I listened to her book. She's very forthright and clear.
She rose so fast and things blew up so quickly she hadn’t had all the starry-eyed idealism beaten out of her. I wonder what her future will be.
Grammar errors abound call *…. Why would he have immunity with Jack Smith and not Fani Willis?
My remarks may have sounded a bit cart before the horse, and I realize Smith can’t know what path to take without knowing what Meadows will say..But I find it odd to give a potential witness Use or Transactional Immunity if there is not a cooperation agreement in place..Reporting has Meadows sitting before the Grand Jury several times.. have to wonder at what point a cooperation agreement would have been obtained by Smith..Certainly before Fani Willis dropped her indictment..
Absolutely - 100% Sam!
Yes, prior to Fani Willis’ indictment. My guess is the minute he left the DC Grand Jury post testimony, he and his attorney contacted Jack Smith. Jack Smith hit pay dirt with him. But Fani didn’t give a royal. He had no protection from her. There are bright minds criminal legal on this site - hoping Bryan and others weigh in on our conjecturing. I’m conjuring you are correct about Mark’s insider-insider agreement with Jack Smith. But when? Joyce will have to give us the legal on that. She was with DOJ!!
Meadows seems to play both sides. Perhaps Smith thinks he can still extract important revelations from Meadows.
And let Fani send him to jail. Win win
Totally agree. Makes no sense..
Good point.
Ty
Agreed.
“If I knew then what I know now,...”
Translated: If I knew I was going to be caught,...
Exactly!!
Yes, I am somewhat pleased with today's outcome with respect for the Ellis deal & maybe the Meadows news or non-news, as the case may be. I think Meadows is a bum, a traitor to the nation, but then I haven't liked him for a long time, all the way back to when he registered to vote in a state he didn't live in, a mobile home he didn't own was what he falsely used for that purpose of casting his ballot there. If a Democrat had done that, he/she would be in their 3rd yr of prison, but NOPE, not for any Republican, nope, not ever. Proves the law is fickle..... He wrote a book FIRST about his adventures in trump land. But, wouldn't testify b4 the J6 Committee. He's a rat. I don't trust him as far as I could toss him. I wouldn't spit on him if he was ablaze either. But, I digress. The dominoes are starting to fall, and that is something for now. My big question is: when will Jack Smith ask Judge Canon to be replaced? Carry on.
Ellis is a phoney. Check her FB page. Spewing falsehoods up until yesterday. She is only sorry she got caught. She will try not to be helpful. She should be in jail. Same is true for Meadows.
She was all starry-eyed thinking she was a valued partner as a constitutional lawyer.
@ some point she realized she was just an arm candy mascot.
She just realized she was stupid, just a useful idiot, a dupe and now roadkill.
Of course she’s crying. Truth hurts.
“You would cry too if it happened to you.”
-- Lesley Gore, it’s my party.
We would not need a DOJ criminal branch if everyone were conscientious and truthful. Ditto the BOP.
Jenna’s white woman tears were BS
Dear Erica, do we really, really need to bring race, gender, preference into this great discussion group? Really?
Oh please, the fainting couch is over that way ... I don't think this forum needs ultra snowflakes. I totally agree that her "white woman" tears were totally privilege on show.
I just can't resist, call me snowflake, I just can't: Bwahahahaha https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/oct/16/the-voice-referendum-is-lost-what-should-happen-now
Thanks for the new name, Ultra Snowflakes is heaps ripper. Love it....Tex ultra snowflake, grows on y'all
Ouch! Certainly the “privilege” part is on display. Why not just leave it there. We are all unimpressed by these folks who are nearly three years later facing some accountability?. (Counting from November 2020 until now.)
Good point, Bruce. Let’s just state that the tears seem too late to the party.
Take your misogynistic over intellectualized self sit down and be quiet for once in your entitled white man’s life. Please.
More racism Erica, you actually did it three times in one sentence. You must be real good at it.
Thank you, Joyce. I am not impressed with Jenna Ellis either as a person or a lawyer. I hope she testifies truthfully but will not be surprised if she slips in a word or two in defense of Trump. From everything I've read about her, she is mostly outraged at having been charged with all the felonies and lies she committed, then having the trump team refuse to pay for her defense.
Mark Meadows on thew other hand has way more to tell about Trump's role and knowledge of the treasonous insurrection and damage to OUR Capitol Building, it is not any political parties' building it belongs to us. Just as the White House and all other Federal Buildings belong to us. If Meadows testifies truthfully in any of the three trials directly linked to Trump's treasonous behavior we can heave a sigh of relief as the ugly orange bag of blubber is hauled off to spend the rest of his sordid life in prison. {And, yes I am resorting to name calling like any 8th grader.]
A pox on Meadows
We are in this together but Mark Meadows is not with us. He is out on a limb and hung out to dry. Serves him right for being a manically arrogant a-hole. And a traitor to American democracy that millions gave their lives to preserve. May he live in abject shame in perpetuity, plus one day.
Love your curse!
Karma would send him to that trailer he never lived in.
Thank you Joyce for all of your hard work to keep us informed. I’m not sure I believe Mark Meadows’ attorney. I think he has made a deal of some kind with Jack Smith and is keeping it very quiet. If he was never one of the unnamed co-conspirators, he may just be a protected, uncharged witness. And he is trading testimony for protection.
Trump reminds me of the orange toad sitting in a saucepan full of water. The heat is increasing slowly and it does notice anything until it's thouroughly cooked. And ready to serve... lol
Fake Tears Jenna should be serving jail time, as should the others who pled guilty and cooperated with Prosecutors Roto avoid doing so. How they got off without serving a day is mind blowing. Unfortunately, this is how the system works in white American.
"How they got off without serving a day is mind blowing."
Three reasons I reckon: (a) they're white and white collar, so privileged (b) they are lawyers, and fellow lawyers (even prosecutors) give them huge amounts of slack and deference, and (c) they are really really after Trump and Giuliani, and will do ANYTHING in terms of deals with lesser mortals to get to the light on the hill. I would too, I reckon.
Fani is only after The Don ... everybody else can get off.
But they haven’t testified yet.
They have been made to supply testimony in advance that can be used to guide their future testimony in court AND be a check on any future "forgotten details and facts".....
AND it's already on tape.
Appearing remorseful that you weren’t pardoned and caught is not exactly remorseful.