Discover more from Jim Pfaff
Coercion or Evidence
Does the admission by Jenna Ellis in the Trump case in Georgia prove Fani Willis' case?
There's a difference between what you will be told and what you won't be told.
You will be told by media and others that this is proof the Trump legal team didn't tell the truth. What you won't be told is that this is a person who faces heavy legal fees putting her in legal jeopardy. This statement was coerced. You also won't be told that Jenna Ellis was hired not primarily for legal advice but to be an effective spokesperson for the case.
Evidence or Coercion?
What does this statement actually say about Jenna Ellis?
1. She is facing massive legal bills. Yes. She is a lawyer. Why doesn't she represent herself? The saying "any lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client" applies. You put yourself in jeopardy if you try to represent yourself because you cannot act in a neutral manner.
2. Because she cannot put up an effective defense of herself, she took the path of least risk. That doesn't necessarily say anything bad about her. It also doesn't say anything about what she did IN POINT OF FACT because...
3. Prosecutors have an immense amount of authority not only to coerce accurate admissions from guilty parties but also to coerce inaccurate admissions from parties who may have no guilt at all.
(ABOVE: Jenna Ellis’ statement before the Fulton County Court)
What does this statement say about Donald Trump's case or the others who have been charged? Actually, nothing.
Jenna Ellis made a statement about her judgment as a person and as a lawyer. She claimed that she erred and "failed to do my due diligence" in her activities as a lawyer. This speaks to her abilities and failings. This statement says nothing of substance about the case itself. She claims she didn't properly analyze the judgment of her fellow lawyers in the case. This doesn't speak to the guilt or innocence of their actions. That assertion is her opinion, not proof any guilt in others. She will presumably testify to the actions of her fellow lawyers in a negative way. But she may be successfully countered as too inexperienced to handle the case by her own admission. She has countered any assertion of guilt on the part of those on the legal team with her admitted lack of skill as a lawyer.
In fact, Jenna Ellis was not qualified to head up the legal challenges in 2020.
Jenna Ellis was a young lawyer in 2020 who had only been in practice for a short time. She wasn't hired to provide the lead advice on the case. She was hired because as an effective spokesperson she also had enough legal knowledge to properly speak to the facts the Trump team was pursuing. Conclusion: Jenna Ellis has done very little to prove the prosecutions case. Her admissions in this video do more to exonerate rather than prove culpability on the part of the Trump legal team.