First Trump Co-Defendant Pleads Guilty in Georgia
The deal includes Hall testifying at any trial for the other 18 defendants, including President Donald Trump.
Scott Hall, a Georgia bail bondsman, pleaded guilty to five counts of conspiring to commit intentional interference with performance of election duties.
The deal includes Hall testifying at any trial for the other 18 defendants, including President Donald Trump:
Hall, 59, who was involved in a breach of election equipment, pleaded guilty Friday in Atlanta to five counts of conspiring to commit intentional interference with performance of election duties. The plea deal included an agreement to a sentence of five years of probation, a $5,000 fine and a letter of apology to the state.
Part of the plea deal requires Hall to testify against others at future trials or hearings of “any co-defendants” in the election racketeering case. The felony charges against Hall were dropped as part of the agreement.
Trump was not mentioned by name during Hall’s plea hearing, but a Fulton County prosecutor did mention co-defendant and former Trump attorney Sidney Powell as being involved in the alleged scheme to gain access to Dominion voting machines in Coffee County, Ga.
Hall cannot speak to the media until all trials have ended. He also cannot participate in any voting activities.
The indictment identified Hall “as participating in an effort to access the voting machines and equipment in Coffee County — a post-election bid by Trump allies who were purportedly investigating allegations of voter fraud in hopes of reversing Joe Biden’s victory in the state.”
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
So to be clear… this was the guy who claimed that the election machinery was hackable during the election, then after the election, said “let me prove to you how easy it was to hack into them,” demonstrated, and… they killed the messenger.
That’s the condensed version but yeah pretty much.
Since he has agreed to testify, he can recount his previous statements on cross examination or as a direct witness for the defense
Scott Hall is now a political dissident – casualty of the Woke culture war. It’s obvious he’s not wealthy enough to mount a yearslong legal defense.
ACLU has exited the chat.
@ReduxxMag
Sep 24
The ACLU has been hard at work fighting to ensure males have the right to self-identify into women’s prisons, no matter how violent they are.
One of the men they helped gain transfer beat a woman to death, drank her blood, and stole her identity
Isn’t this also the same case where the lawyers produced documented permission from the authorities responsible for controlling access to the voting machines, allowing them the exact access they are accused of criminally violating?
I believe you are correct.
Coward.
That’s easy to say when you’re not the one facing possibly millions of dollars in legal fees (not to mention jail time). Ask the Donald about his 40 mil and counting (on you to send him more). As they say, the process is the punishment.
Yes, it is…see my response below. A sign of our times…weakness.
Incidentally, PDJT is not a coward, he’s a warrior with plenty of eff-you money, and he’s using it to fight these demons for the good of our country and his supporters.
Dude didn’t have the money to fight The Cathedral so did what the majority of people in Federal Court do even if not guilty. Plea out.
I don’t think that’s the stick being used in Georgia. They killed Kemp’s future son-in-law to keep Kemp in line in 2020, my bet is that this man has family that is vulnerable.
Very true…brings to mind the old adage “You can’t fight City Hall”. I would say that is true for the one-off but not when it becomes rampant to “the many” by those working hard to steal elections by preemptively prosecuting political opponents and/or dissenters (‘dissent’ is a Constitutional duty to avoid tyranny). This J6 et al situation is a very sad commentary on where our nations sits at this point — tyranny reigns from those who have now determined “we” work for them, not the other way around as prescribed by The Founders.
As the long-arm of injustice gets longer each year under the anarchists, who by all accounts desire to return us to King George England (from which we excised ourselves through great sacrifice by brave men and woman), it will get closer to this:
“…when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
How much did you donate to his legal defense? Just asking to find out your own level of personal commitment to his cause.
“They’re not principles until you have to defend them.”
I know of a few J6 Political Prisoners who as Christians would not cop a guilty plea because they knew they were innocent and doing so would be a lie. This Georgia thing is another Demented Democrat travesty, it is unconstitutional, and should not be entertained. If it were me (it never would be, but for arguments sake), and I knew I did nothing wrong, I’d tell them all to go pound sand, consequences be damned….I answer to God first.
….” own level of personal commitment to his cause.”
A strawman…so if I haven’t sent him funds I’m somehow disallowed from commenting? I have no idea who he is, and besides, these cases are a lost cause, they’re theater for effect. Congress should be acting to stop this debacle, but they won’t because they are in on it.
If they’re theater, why do you care if he took a plea to save his ass from an unhinged prosecutor who can go after him forever with the taxpayers as her checkbook?
Nah you are always free to make dumbass claims and throw around highly charged terms such as ‘cowardice’ or ‘treason’ without offering any evidence to support your conclusion. The rest of us free to voice disagreement and to point out some of the flaws in your conclusions.
The point about sending this guy some funding is very simple. It takes significant funds to mount a worthwhile defense. This is especially so where an ideologically motivated prosecutor is using every tool to make sure the process itself is part of a version of pretrial punishment.
You now admit these cases are a ‘lost cause and theater’ and that you ‘don’t have any idea who he is’. That would mean you understand he can’t win and that you have zero personal insight into this man’s financial, marital, family life or mental state under the extreme pressure brought against him and so you can’t truthfully tell us if he is a coward or is instead making the best decision under the circumstances for his family. Just as LTG Flynn did in his prosecution to keep his son out of jail.
Not arguing nits here. My main point is we must fight tyranny individually and as We The People, otherwise it’ll get much worse as those doing the deeds will get further emboldened.
Throwing around very loaded claims of cowardice then refusing to offer evidence or defend your claims is a bad look. It’s completely unfair to make such a claim and characterize this man’s decision without knowing exactly what was going on.
Crap like this is why we should bring back dueling. Then we can all see exactly who the cowards are when very direct and personal consequences are attached to wild claims.
“How much did you donate to defense?”
I think that’s the better question. Ds are willing to kill their political enemies, or the family of their political enemies, to keep them in line. The process is the “fake because” – the reality is that terrorists run great portions of our country.
Pleading guilty to poverty.
So why the hell didn’t Donald Trump pardon all of these J6 protestors when he had the power to do so? Instead, they are rotting in jail, while he enjoys his luxurious life as multi-billionaire in Florida. Go figure.
Probably because their cases didn’t come before Democrat courts until after 20 Jan.
You can’t pardon someone until they are charged, in court and convicted of something.
diver64: You can’t pardon someone until they are charged, in court and convicted of something.
That is incorrect. For instance, Nixon was never criminally charged much less convicted but was granted a pardon, which he accepted. (However, a grand jury was set to charge Nixon with bribery, conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and obstruction of a criminal investigation.)
Zach is correct, to give the Devil his due.
He could have simply provided a blanket pardon for any actions undertaken that day in DC and in the months leading up to J6 in preparation for any of their actions that day. That would forestall any Federal prosecution.
A reminder (for people who should not need reminding): The distance between President Trump of January 6 and former President Trump of January 20 is 2 weeks. During that relatively short time period, the DOJ had just barely begun to look into prosecuting the most violent and criminal actions taken during the riot, and Ray Epps was still on the FBI Most Wanted List. Only once Trump was safely out of office did the DOJ start up the midnight raids and criminalization of such terrible political crimes as Standing On The Grass While Holding a Flag, or even Walking Through Open Doors Held By Police To Use The Restroom In Freezing Weather And Leaving Right After. Thats why I support a full and complete pardon for every human being within a block of the Capitol on that day for anything done.
“it is better a hundred guilty persons should escape than one innocent person should suffer’
–Benjamin Franklin
Nor was the Nixon pardon the first such. The history of presidents pardoning people without waiting for them to be charged goes all the way back to George Washington.
The (expensive) process is the usually punishment in the left’s typical lawfare. In their new anything goes banana republic police state, add to that incarceration. But anything involving Willis is suspect and my first impression is that he shouldn’t have folded, although I’m not under the pressure of a banana republic indictment.
And likely further impoverishment. Over the course of eighteen possible trial cases he may spend many hundreds of hours sitting in court not earning living. And by not earning a living he may be forced into bankruptcy.
It’s literally a monetary penalty tacked onto his $5000 plea fine.
And according camperfixer, that makes him a coward.
Only from the standpoint of the guilty plea. The Democrat subversives have created a no-win situation for anyone caught in their seditious lawfare web. It’s only money…character, integrity, and principles matter more. Jesus stood and said nothing when being accused of a bunch of made up “infractions” by the “Give us Barabbas!” rabble, when in fact they simply hated him for speaking truth.
“It’s only money… character, integrity, and principles matter more […]
Scott Hall did more than talk about character and integrity and principles from the comfort of his overstuffed easy chair, he displayed all three of those things. And by doing so, it landed him in serious legal jeopardy.
You talk of the failure of Scott Hall not falling on his sword, and then set him against the Son of God.
Vanity of vanities, all is vanity.
Principles and all that, have to be weighed. A man with only himself to fight for, can risk it all for principle as he is accountable only to God and himself. When there are others in the picture, say a wife and children, that act of “cowardice” in the eyes of the world, is the sacrifice of a hero to those who depend on him.
Where you have espoused Christian values to this discussion, I come to a different conclusion. Why on earth would any child of God who has heard the Spirit’s call to “come out from among the world” and give their life to God in Christ, get involved in politics in the first place? Where politics is all about compromise between the law of God and the ways of the world? Someone decides to drag the presence of God into politics (we are after all “temples of the Holy Spirit” (1 Cor. 3:16/6:19, et al)) with the mistaken notion of trying to reform the world – and they’re shocked / horrified when the world crucifies them? Spiritually speaking, there is only one end for the world – and you know that. “I came to bring fire to the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled” Jesus said. Our mission therefore, is to show Christ to those who are in the world, that they might come to know Him and likewise come out of the world.
For the ones who dive into the world to “rehabilitate” it – or to establish a “kingdom for God” on the earth, they often get their proverbial asses handed to them by the world, who since the beginning, has labored to evict God from the world. Why not heed the teachings of Christ and echoed by Paul, to live a simple and humble life, own no man anything, make a living with your hands, etc.?
The devout Christian who gets hammered by the world, from a spiritual perspective anyway, is just paying the world’s price for encroachment / compromise. Metaphorically, not unlike those back woods churches in the SE where they practice snake-handling (Mark 16) – every once in awhile, someone gets bit and dies. Do any of them consider Jesus words “do not put the Lord thy God to the test”? Where vipers are a metaphoric symbol for the devil, why on earth would a Christian play with them? Likewise Christians in politics?
The main reason I read / follow politics, is to assess the times and seasons, for prayer, and for making informed choices / decisions. I have no illusions about where this world is going and view my role as to helping those tangled up in it, find real freedom.
Is there any way to make these people whole, hopefully at the expense of Dems?
General Flynn lost everything on garbage charges but managed to survive and come out the other side. He was the first to be subject to this anarchy…all done by the same lunatic Party…altho, it’s mostly one party now.
Under the circumstances, looks like Mr. Hall was coerced, and took a plea deal under duress. Maybe there should be a law against that. How very convenient now that the state will not have to have to prove its case by presenting facts or evidence. Of course what they want is his testimony. Coerced. And under duress. Seems like there should be a law against that.
Coercion as you term it is a part of the system that is very unsavory but commonplace and this set of prosecutors seem to be using every pressure point to achieve compliance. Lots of defendants find themselves pressured heavily indeed and some give up and plead guilty to make it stop or b/c they are trying to salvage something of their finances for their family v fighting a losing battle in CT.
Plea deals should be illegal. If you have the proof, and can make the case, you should charge the criminal. Using extrajudicial means to coerce guilty pleas and avoid actual trials is at the very least immoral
They ain’t exactly ‘extrajudicial’ so much as using all the various options at their disposal to make the process very difficult and very painful. As an example in some States you can be arrested for a citation at the discretion of the LEO. If they decide to be a dick you gonna go in the back of the squad car to be booked. They have the option to do so but not the requirement to do so in those States. This is a similar sort of thing where the prosecution is utilizing their options in a very harsh manner.
This is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard. Plea deals keep our court system moving.
Are there problems with the system? Sure….making plea deals illegal would definitely not fix them.
No, he’s right. Plea deals should be banned. Yes, that will mean that we have to put many more resources into the justice system. But that’s what justice costs. What we have now isn’t justice.
so why isn’t that witness intimidation or bribing a witness?
Another attribute of the police state.
You’ve got the cutest little baby face.
Of course part of his deal is to turn on others and make up anything the government wants him to say, that’s how they roll.
I feel very bad for Hall. He is innocent, but is in a horrible, no-win situation. The Dems and DOJ (but I repeat myself) are threatening him with decades in prison and $100s of thousands, if not millions of dollars in legal fee to defend himself. Money he does not have. To battle a foe with unlimited funds that often uses illegal and extralegal means to convict the innocent and guilty alike and that have something like a 97% conviction rate.
What choice does he have? What choice did Winston Smith have when two starving rats where in cages attached to his eyes, ready to eat his eye out of Smith didn’t agree to love big brother?
The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.
Thucydides c.455–c.400 bc