I don't think anyone here is saying she shouldn't be going to prison or that she should be going there for less than a decade. But spending 65 years in jail for

I don't think anyone here is saying she shouldn't be going to prison or that she should be going there for less than a decade. But spending 65 years in jail for _anything_ short of substantially heinous crimes should cause anyone to question the motivation behind the sentencing. I understand that the wire fraud is what's causing the time to stack up here, but a 65 year sentence would be ridiculous. I'm much more onboard with a 10-25 year sentence though, even if there's perjury involved.