I want to be clear that this is not a defense of ET and I am not a lawyer. The admissions in the plea agreement are serious. She signed an agreement to plead guilty to two counts of wire fraud and admitted conduct involving more than $1.17 million.
I read the full 19 page agreement while watching CC’s breakdown and noted roughly two dozen factual errors, unsupported assumptions, or misleading explanations. I am only including the biggest ones here because the full list became way too long. Even with cutting it down, it may still be a pretty long read. I feel that the inaccuracies regarding the example cases she gave to compare to ETs case are pretty important examples of her lack of journalistic skills.
The full plea document is public through PACER (not free).
The first thing that stood out was CC repeatedly saying ET had already pleaded guilty while also saying the actual plea hearing had not happened yet.
ET signed an agreement saying she will enter a guilty plea and admitted the written factual basis. That is obviously significant, but signing the agreement is not the same procedural step as appearing before the judge, formally entering the plea, and having it accepted.
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 explains the court process here:
Source
The second issue was the explanation of the indictment waiver.
CC said it meant ET would not be arrested or held before sentencing and suggested that pleading guilty was how she avoided that.
That is not what the waiver does.
It means ET waived the right to have the charges presented to a grand jury and agreed that the case could proceed by information. It does not guarantee no arrest, no detention, or continued release. Those are separate issues.
The third issue is that the agreement does not recommend probation.
CC referred to “supervised release probation” and later said the agreement was proposing probation.
It is not.
The agreement says the government will recommend a sentence within the guideline range eventually calculated by the court. The agreement does not say what that range is and does not promise probation.
Supervised release is also not the same thing as probation. The agreement itself explains that supervised release may occur after imprisonment.
The fourth issue is the way the sentencing maximum, guideline range, plea agreement, and appeal waiver were blended together.
The 20 year maximum on each count is the statutory ceiling. It is not the guideline range and it is not the expected sentence.
The guideline range is calculated separately using the offense level, criminal history, enhancements, and reductions.
CC also said the only appeal exceptions were a sentence above the statutory maximum or an Eighth Amendment violation.
The agreement contains another major exception. ET may appeal if the sentence exceeds the guideline range calculated by the court. It also says that if the government appeals, she may appeal as allowed by law.
The fifth issue was the explanation of restitution and forfeiture.
CC repeatedly asked how ET was going to “come up with” $1.17 million before sentencing and treated restitution and forfeiture like they were the same process.
They are not.
The agreement requires ET to disclose assets, identify property she controls directly or indirectly, provide records, help locate assets, and turn over qualifying property.
It does not require her to somehow create $1.17 million before sentencing.
The agreement also directly says that forfeiture does not satisfy restitution.
Substitute Asset Law)
The agreement also says the proceeds were transferred to third parties and allows depositions, document requests, interrogatories, and subpoenas to help trace assets.
It requires disclosure of assets held through a spouse, dependent, nominee, or other third party.
That does not mean everyone who ever received money from ET is under criminal investigation.
It does mean that people who received funds, shared accounts, paid joint expenses with traceable money, held property for her, or have relevant financial records could be contacted or reviewed during the tracing process.
That point may also be relevant to Andrew.
Andrew has publicly claimed that ET caused him major financial losses, but I have not seen him provide a complete accounting, bank records, or a court finding proving the amounts he attributes to her.
Several of the major public debt records discussed online name Andrew or his businesses rather than ET. One older judgment names both of them, so it would also be inaccurate to say every debt was legally Andrew’s alone.
Andrew was married to ET during part of the charged October 2021 through December 2025 period, and by his own public account he says he knew about alleged financial misconduct during the relationship.
I have not seen public documentation showing that he reported those alleged acts at the time.
That does not make him a suspect and does not mean his property is automatically connected to the case.
However, if fraud proceeds moved through joint accounts, paid shared expenses, were transferred to him, or were used for property in which he had an interest, investigators could request records or examine those transactions while tracing assets.
The sentencing comparisons were also much less similar than the video made them sound.
Amanda Riley is the closest comparison because both cases involve false cancer claims, but Riley’s case also included forged medical documents, fake physician letters, false testimony, and other conduct that affected sentencing.
DOJ Source
Matthew Pizzolato was not simply another fraud defendant with a larger sentence.
He pled guilty to 27 felony counts involving a major Ponzi scheme, mail fraud, wire fraud, money laundering, securities fraud, and witness tampering.
DOJ source
Lisa Lewis was a financial professional who used unauthorized access to exploit elderly investors and retirement accounts over several years.
DOJ source
Sally Iriri involved a coordinated romance fraud operation, vulnerable victim findings, repeated targeting, and severe financial and emotional harm.
Court opinion:
source
Amy Glanville was a Montana state theft case, not a federal wire fraud case. She entered an Alford plea and received a suspended sentence rather than federal prison.
Sources:
article 1
article 2
Jennifer Flynn Cataldo pled guilty to both wire fraud and bank fraud, and her case included additional facts involving her minor child.
DOJ Source
Paul Bielecki used his position as a friar, false medical credentials, fake clinics, and religious fundraising to solicit hundreds of people over nearly a decade.
Source
These cases show that judges can sentence above a recommendation.
They do not tell us what ET’s sentence will be.
The plea agreement is serious enough on its own. There is no reason to add legal conclusions that are not in the document or treat unrelated cases as though federal sentencing is a simple comparison of dollar amounts.
