Well, we can't really expect her to know the difference between 'speculation' and 'inference,' after all.
She did imply that 10% of the affidavit contains some facts, in her defense.
Oh wow, that's an interesting point. You are very likely right. In fact, she expects people to take everything she says as fact, while what everyone else says is "speculation" (even if it is grounded in the most solid inference).
For example, about the rental cars: maybe she used someone else's credit card to rent them? So she didn't really have a rental car. Therefore (she's claiming) there's no proof she was actually in any rental cars. Now we all know that the rental car agency took her Driver's License number as well, but she's just not going to remember or mention that. The rental agency probably has video of her each time she rented from them. But that's not in the AA and she doesn't know that yet.
In the early days of this case, when she still had her FB open and she was so active on FB, she began asking people in earnest, "What kinds of evidence could LE even have on this case?" and people were telling her, "Well, there could be DNA evidence" or "video evidence of many kinds." She seemed quite activated by this knowledge and began much more of her pre-splaining, including a lot that has now become public. She had already made the gate statement before any of this happened, and now we know she was back in South Carolina when she was so active on FB. She must have been frantic, wondering how things were going down back in CO, while LE remained cool and aloof, refusing to feed her needs.
The behavioral advice that LE got in this case was really great, it seems to me.
As an anthropologist, this case became my first foray into the world of FB group behavior, following LS around where ever I could. I believe this is how she met the people with whom she later had phone calls.
There were at least two women who tried to help her out by explaining how all these different kinds of evidence could be brought against her. LS saw it as being friendly and helpful, but it really scared her. She was still thinking she could get away with it.
I was not permitted into any of her support groups because I answered their questions honestly, as I must, according to professional ethics. But she clearly rounded up some of these helpful people and got them into a couple of closed FB groups.
To me, it seemed obvious that many of the members of those groups were there to snoop on her, and in fact, several posted various places (here on WS, on reddit, on other closed FB groups), making it clear they were there to spy.
I wonder how she deals with the "speculation" that she was wearing shoes when she murdered Gannon and forgot to get rid of them. I also wonder about her statement, that went something like, "I know who did this and I've put that behind me...moving on." I think it was in an interview with Leigh. She may have truly mega-ability to compartmentalize and disassociate.