Posted on 11/21/2020 12:12:14 PM PST by Kaslin
Well, Fox News Host Tucker Carlson seems to have gotten himself into some hot water, hasn’t he? On Thursday evening, he criticized Trump lawyer Sidney Powell for not providing evidence for some of the claims she has made regarding the presidential election and voter fraud.
On his show, Carlson explained that the attorney refused to give him evidence showing that voting software illegitimately flipped votes from President Trump to former Vice President Joe Biden. He indicated that even though Carlson’s team texted her for evidence showing that Dominion Voting Systems machines and software switched votes in Biden’s favor, she refused to provide any.
Carlson, pointing out that he did not initially dismiss her claims, said:
“On Sunday night, we texted her after watching one of her segments. What Powell was describing would amount to the single greatest crime in American history, millions of votes stolen in a day. Democracy destroyed. The end of our centuries-old system of self-government — not a small thing.”
He continued, stating that his team had “no intention of fighting with her,” and that they “simply wanted to see the details.” Carlson continued, insisting that if Powell had been willing, they would have “given her the whole hour” but that “she never sent us any evidence, despite a lot of requests.”
Then, Carlson got to the good part. He said:
“When we kept pressing, she got angry and told us to stop contacting her. When we checked with others around the Trump campaign, people in positions of authority, they told us Powell has never given them any evidence either. Nor did she provide any today at the press conference.”
He concluded by saying, “she never demonstrated that a single actual vote was moved illegitimately by software from one candidate to another. Not one.”
Tucker Carlson: “We invited Sidney Powell on the show. We would’ve given her the whole hour…But she never sent us any evidence despite a lot of requests — polite requests. Not a page. When we kept pressing, she got angry & told us to stop contacting her.”pic.twitter.com/hPHoP477D6
— JERRY DUNLEAVY (@JerryDunleavy) November 20, 2020
Powell responded to Carlson’s remarks in an interview with the Washington Examiner. She said:
“Apparently Mr. Carlson missed the news conference today. I would continue to encourage him and all journalists to review all the materials we have provided so far and conduct their own investigations. Evidence continues to pour in, but a 5 minute television hit is not my focus now. Collecting evidence and preparing the case are my top priorities.”
Needless to say, Carlson’s comments elicited fiery criticism from the right. Conservatives excoriated him for appearing to attack Powell. In essence, they seem to be upset with him for failing to toe the party line.
Here’s the thing, Carlson is a political commentator and a journalist. It’s his job to ask for evidence, especially in a high-stakes story like this, especially when it involves bold claims that could literally prove that the entire election was fraudulent. If the voting software was designed to cheat, it would completely undermine faith in American elections.
Also, Powell’s reasoning for not providing evidence to support her claims is a bit odd. Carlson would have already watched the press conference, which is how he would know that she didn’t quite provide evidence while addressing reporters.
Of course, there is also the possibility that Powell can’t divulge the evidence until later during the court proceedings. In fact, this seems to be the most likely explanation. But if that were the case, why didn’t she just say, “Hey, I can’t reveal any of this stuff until later, Mr. Tucky Wucky?”
It would have been super easy, right?
Either way, Carlson has the right to ask for evidence to prove someone’s claims whether he actually receives it or not. That’s how journalism works.
But regardless of this little tiff, it appears that Carlson might get his wish soon. During an appearance with Fox Business’ Maria Bartiromo, Powell stated that she would be able to prove her claims in court “within two weeks.”
Powell told Bartiromo, “We have more evidence now than the present population is imprisoned on.” She continued, claiming that people “in the control room” saw how the votes were flipped in real-time.
“We have evidence now of information from the systems going to three or four different foreign countries during the time of the election, those countries themselves could have watched the live votes come in and changed at the numbers,” the lawyer said. “There’s significant evidence of foreign interference from the worst communist countries on the Earth with our election.”
When the Fox host asked Powell what the “most stunning, most egregious” piece of evidence Trump’s legal team has the attorney brought up a military officer “who saw it all done and was there when it was created.”
She added, “We’ve got all kinds of evidence that is mathematically irrefutable by experts, including three professors at Princeton, and it all proves the same thing, the evidence of individual poll watchers who saw votes come in, saw the machines manipulated.”
If Powell’s claims are accurate, then the nation might be in for an earth-shattering surprise within two weeks. But this appears to be the last opportunity for the president’s team to prove that the election was stolen. If his legal team doesn’t deliver the goods, the battle over the election will likely be over.
He addressed that issue, and the fact that poll watchers were kept too far from the vote counters to see what they were doing. The latter issue was subsequently rejected by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in a separate case, where they interpreted the Pennsylvania statute to mean that poll watchers had to be in the same room, but not necessarily close enough to see anything. So Giuliani's federal case is down to the unequal treatment issue.
Was he referring to mail-in ballots being received after 8 p.m. on election day? That issue doesn’t pertain to voter fraud. That issue is about whether the state Supreme Court violated the constitution in extending the deadline past 8 p.m. on election night.
That issue is the subject of a separate case pending before SCOTUS, who have been sitting on it for weeks without deciding whether or not to hear it. Justice Alito did issue an order requiring ballots received after election night to be segregated, in case SCOTUS eventually decides to invalidate them. Pennsylvania officials say there were only about 3,000 of those ballots, so (assuming that's true) they wouldn't be enough to switch the results.
And, how many late ballots might have been mixed in with regular ones in violation of Alito's order? We'll probably never know.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.