• jballs
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I totally get it, and in the grand scheme it makes perfect sense. You let the little fish get off easy in order to secure a conviction on the big fish.

    With that being said, I share the feeling of what u/enkers said above. It’s disappointing that a lawyer, who damn well should have known better, can engage in a plot to overthrow our democracy and then get off with a slap on the wrist. It doesn’t exactly serve as a deterrent for future conspirators, knowing that there are no serious consequences for helping “the bigger fish” commit crimes.

    • bemenaker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      She will be disbarred as well. And, depending on what she has said, she may be extremely exposed to civil lawsuits now.

    • atomicorange@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      She always seemed like one of the biggest instigators to me. She drove a lot of the worst rhetoric and made up a lot of pure bullshit. Like you said, as a lawyer she should have been even more aware than her co-defendants how illegal this shit was.

      I hope there’s good strategy behind the decision to allow her to plea. If her testimony can directly implicate Trump or others it might be worthwhile. She also might be dumb enough to violate the terms of her plea, in which case you get her confession AND you get to throw the book at her.