New York Times correspondent and CNN analyst Maggie Haberman and CNN anchor Dana Bash were recently boggled by the potential insights ex-Trump lawyer Sidney Powell could provide in coming trials after her guilty plea via Media Ite.
It has been noted that the news broke Thursday morning, that Powell — one of Trump’s 18 co-defendants in the Georgia election crimes case brought by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis — has accepted a plea deal that will require her testimony at future trials.
On Thursday afternoon’s edition of CNN’s Inside Politics, Bash and Haberman marveled at the doors Powell’s testimony could open for prosecutors, both agreeing “There’s a lot there!”:
“BASH: Back to what this Sidney Powell situation means, and we should remind our viewers that we’re talking about plans to overturn the 2020 election. And specifically, there was a key meeting at the White House, this was December 18th, 2020. Military seizing voting machines and states Trump lost naming Sidney Powell as a special counsel to investigate supposed voter fraud, and Trump invoking martial law to overturn the election.
This is just some of what we’re talking about. And so if this is a White House meeting, and if, again, this is mostly about — this is about Georgia, but still, if Sidney Powell is willing to spill the beans on what Donald Trump might have been saying in that White House meeting, that could be significant.
HABERMAN: There’s no question. And Dana, to your point, that meeting related to what she was charged with. So, you know, I expect that you will see if she is called to testify, which I expect if there are trials in this case, she will be, her having to talk in full about that.
Now remember, she and other participants in that meeting, and it was a wild meeting that we reported on, that CNN reported on, Jonathan Swan at Axios reported on, it was a lengthy, wild meeting that laid bare how serious Donald Trump was about trying to stay in office once we learned of the details.
But it’s a meeting that Powell and Giuliani and other people who were in that meeting from the other side trying to stop it. Testified to extensively before the House Select Committee investigating Trump’s efforts to subvert the election. How much more she would offer on top of that? I don’t know.
But certainly, prosecutors sometimes tend to ask different questions. And yes, there are a few meetings that were as revealing about Trump’s mindset and what he was thinking about than that one, including the fact that he really was talking seriously to people as we reported, as others have about making her a special counsel in the White House and getting her security clearance.
BASH: Still, sort of — that makes your brain jumble inside your head. Thank you so much, Maggie.
HABERMAN: So there’s a lot there.
BASH: A lot there. Yes, that’s an understatement!
HABERMAN: There’s a lot there.
BASH: Maggie, thank you so much for coming on. Great to see you.
HABERMAN: Thanks, Dana.”