Posted on 11/23/2020 8:54:29 PM PST by Rightwing Conspiratr1
We have all been following the recent election issues, public statements and press conferences. There have been big developments on what Sidney Powell has said, and what has been delivered to date. The question is: Has Sidney Powell compromised her standing in the statements she has made given the evidence that has not (yet) been provided to substantiate those claims?
LOL
Barnes says a lot of things and sounds very competent and loves to critique other lawyers. But I have yet to see him accomplish anything himself. He reminds me of AG barr.
I hate when a headline asks a question. Is his answer yes, or is it no?
I got into an argument yesterday with someone who was babbling Powell’s inane talking points about Dominion software, automatic changes in cote totals, etc. I presented a scenario from my own precinct to demonstrate how preposterous the whole conspiracy theory is:
“Suppose 1,000 people vote in my precinct — 600 of them vote for Trump and 400 vote for Biden. The computer secretly switches 200 of the Trump votes to Biden. Now how is this done in such a way that a hand recount of the paper ballots doesn’t immediately expose the whole thing as a fraud?”
The CIA has 6 different ways to get back at you....
They fed McCarthy bad information in order to destroy him when he was correct on most of his points.
There’s been maybe one, if any, hand recounts, for starters. And the results of the recount in Georgia were never released, they certified the original vote, that was counted by computer.
Do you have any possible explanations for the live videos, such as those from CNN election coverage showing votes being taken away from Trump, and other Republican candidates, in the tallies displayed in the screen?
You’re assuming the recount was done properly, which was not the case in Georgia. In addition, they created fake ballots to support the Biden votes and destroyed the Trump votes. That’s why they had to delay the counting. There is plenty of evidence.
That’s exactly what Giuliani is saying here. The REAL focus of the election challenge should be on mail-in ballots that were cast on behalf of people who never actually voted.
See Post #10. You’re not wrong, but think about it: If the Democrats were going to destroy Trump ballots and fabricate Biden ballots then they certainly didn’t need some hocus-pocus computer program to rig the results for them.
Perfectly stated, as usual. Hopefully that will be enough to win, but there are many variables that may preclude a limited strategy from working. The Dominion angle may be needed at some point, and shouldn't be completely ostracized by Team Trump in my opinion.
There are several reasons the Dominion story has captured so much interest. First, it or something similar was predicted before the election. Second, there's video evidence from the major networks showing votes for Trump going down, when new count refreshes took place showing totals for Biden going up. Finally, it's been fairly established that vote tabulations were taking place outside the US for not only this election, but preceding ones.
If Rudy was willing to cause this much of a disturbance by publicly, and possibly unnecessarily jettisoning Powell, and the Dominion/Smartmatic angle, then he better deliver or he will have a lot to answer for.
The software tells them how many fraudulent ballots they need to create.
Hand recounts have yet to take place.
the votes are stored in pdf format, digitally,
when the votes are completed by the voter, the fields change as the voter completes it and then voter gets a receipt for voting. there is no paper copy to count of the actual vote cast because it has been altered to obtain the objective by algorithms, except it does create the falsely populated fields as required on the (like unto a) pdf type version that is digitally created, compiled/scanned/stored pdf type of version on the machine.
The operator CAN print out a paper copy, but that copy does not tie back to the voter’s actual identity or actual votes. This is a feature... vote is NOT TRACEABLE as it is a secret ballot, so secret the voter can not even prove that was there vote... unless the signature exists on the EXACT PAPER , NON machine created ballot...
So you write an algorithm that creates PDF’s with vote altered renderings using algorithms... and that defective vote will always scan the same over and over again.
there is no “real” paper copy of a hand signed ballot.
only the created pdf type version that is stored on a hard drive file/folder and counted as it is printed per the algorithmic values that were already inserted , and will tally exactly the same each time as often as the file folder is queried.
A lot of you people just can’t THINK big enough.
This can’t be, that can’t be...
YES IT ALL CAN! THEY CHEATED! IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE!
Too many of you are just NAIVE!
The Dominion angle is great for PR purposes but it really muddies the water in a legal proceeding — even if Powell’s allegations are 100% accurate. I’m not sure if you watched the video posted at the top of this thread, but if you haven’t then I’d suggest it’s well worth your time.
The lawyer in that video makes a strong case for dropping all the wild allegations that will be almost impossible to prove, and focusing only on those elements of the legal challenges that can be proven easily and directly relate to specific points of law. He has some pretty harsh criticism of Powell in that he seems to think she is in over her head as a civil litigator.
In the aggregate Sidney, Rudy, et al have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that this election was stolen, stolen by a centralized coordinated squad of thugs. For this country the aggregate is the only thing that matters. If congress doesn’t have the balls to go up against a force this powerful then why do we have them?
For that matter, the FBI has been totally silent regarding the crimes uncovered as well as the conspiracy to undermine our voting infrastructure .....which begs the question, who is the power behind this theft.
We have seen the enemy. We are paying their salaries.
I am interested in what Sidney Powell has to say.
Your usual insightful post is most interesting because it also drew several very good replies offering possible explanations for your question. But your post and the replies together demonstrate the problem with Powell’s approach: untangling the evidentiary basis for her claims from the endless evidentiary possibilities.
Lawyers have to deal with reality, whether they like the reality or not, and this is complicated by deadlines. That is how the law NECESSARILY works.
Powell mishandled the Flynn case from the perspective of judgment, evaluating evidence in a legal context, and ethical obligation. Her lack of a coherent legal argument was shocking coming from an appellate lawyer. Her argument was political, and her shoddy legal argument implicitly conceded that.
Apparently the Trump lawyers realized she was similarly not operating in the real world.
This is NOT to say she was/is wrong about the ultimate truth of her allegations, just about what can be proven in a legal context without doing further harm, understanding that the other side gets to speak also whether we like what they say or not.
Powell did Flynn a grave disservice in how she handled his case, possibly an unethical service. She was in the path of doing a similar disservice to Trump.
Totally separate from the quality of her legal judgment is the question of money. Wherever you see Powell, you see dollar signs.
I still feel bitter about the exploitation of the Tea Party movement, bitterness toward the slimy grifters who took advantage of well-meaning but naive patriots, and who helped to destroy a wonderful and hopeful political phenomenon.
Most folks cannot distinguish between a political argument and a legal argument, believing that it is all about truth and justice alike. But legal arguments are FAR more technical and exacting.
Powell worship is just a given fact on our side, which is not justified. She says things we all agree with politically and people assume this means she is a good lawyer. She is not.
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.