Replies

And then...

A funny thing happened on the way to the courtroom...

Just finished watching the live stream of Viva Frei and Robert Barnes discussing news re Sidney Powell being removed from the case. Expect it might be a few minutes before its available as a post-live link...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYJUjkpjZbo

Much there to unpack...

Bottom lines...

1. Sidney is being thrown under the bus... as occurs to anyone in the Trump orbit who appears to be getting a bit too much attention... or, anyone who enjoys it too much.
Same thing happened to Steve Bannon once upon a time ?

Don’t read too much into that yet... as it might also represent ONLY a tactical decision that isolates Sidney in a good way. But, as fact, as she’s been operating as Trump’s lawyer... if Trump doesn’t allow her to use the evidence HE has control over... she has no path forward. And, again, don’t read too much into that... as it doesn’t say there isn’t a path forward for her... only says she won’t be representing the Trump brand while proceeding.

2. Rudy is also being “sidelined”... in favor of a cadre of more technical election law litigators... and that’s a good thing too... but no one wants to talk about that in the same way... why ? Preserves the same division I’d noted earlier in the nature of the physical vs digital frauds.

3. Some of the change is a declaration of success... in that the push given to the story this week has proven sufficient to generate movement... it got things rolling... and in one sense it doesn’t matter now, or it is only a benefit, in the degree people are aware of the problem and that makes them angry about the change... and it adds to the momentum.

4. Barnes is horribly wrong about a couple of things... notably... he’s not a tech guy and doesn’t understand the issues in the computer fraud AT ALL. He’s just horribly wrong about that. He’s also wrong about the Q issue, I think... including somewhat wrong in terms of some of its impact in the long term, but probably not wrong re the intent of it being in deflecting adherents from a more active form of participation in a more useful activism, intentionally sidelining many of those being told “don’t worry, we got this”. In the long term, though, disappointing those people... has bigger costs than it has short term benefits... other than that it does tend to restrain the tendency to violence... until it doesn’t. Barnes thinking the recent computer related stuff is all a Q deflection... looks almost deliberately wrong, IMO.

5. But, that doesn’t make Barnes wrong about the legal decision that has been made... to focus the legal effort on the physical frauds... AND the ongoing malfeasance obstructing proper process. He’s probably not wrong about the relative division in utility and provability... given that most judges are also not computer experts.

That case will take more time than is available to develop it fully, perhaps, but there’s obviously not going to be enough time to make judges into geeks who get it... when it also requires seeing a conspiracy on a scale that they’re probably wanting to, hoping to, working to (and being paid to) avoid seeing.

He only mentioned it briefly... and understated it... but the Michigan Secretary of State’s decision to threaten the Wayne County canvas board members with legal action... is both a felony under Michigan law... and a violation of 18USC 242... deprivation of rights under color of law. Georgia is probably only worse in relation to election law, if having thus far avoided exposing the state officials as thugs.

Barnes is right... that those are the kinds of things judges will understand... and might even be made angry about... and want to sink their teeth into. And doing that, in itself, doesn’t require taking judicial, systemic or personal safety risks...

6. The rest... an open question...

Other explanations might exist for “sidelining” the digital fraud... and those are a reason for concern.

a. It might be the case that a political decision has been made... to put a simple case forward now to benefit re-election, putting that ahead of energizing a more functional activism... or to throttle it a bit... slow the roll... to manage the clock...

b. Also could be... a political DEAL was made... to step back from threatening things that are more direct challenges to “the powers that be”... and the structure of the fraud in the broad terms I discuss... as 1.) a physical fraud, with 2.) a digital fraud that is a conspiracy that includes the monopoly of media control of propaganda... and also threatens three letter agency turf... as well as oligarchical billionaire status as above the law... and, 3.) the physical obstruction of legitimate process... Republicans denied oversight...

c. The shift carves out 2.) above... leaves intact 1.) and 3.) along with an open ended ability to discover the conspiracy extant between 5 (?) states (and who else ?) in those two areas... which, of course, also might lead to discovery exposing additional elements in 2.)

d. Additional risk that making a deal could mean... never addressing the deeper problem in corruption... even if it is paired with a nod in the deal to make/allow Trump’s second term happen... in order to avoid that more onerous risk...

7. Powell made a number of strong statements though. She noted she’s seen what she’s seen... and can’t unsee it. And that’s true of MILLIONS of others too, now...

So, Twitter taking down Powell’s account... only convinces those people who DO get it now... that they’re right.

8. I suspect not in others calculus (or, for others, perhaps that is point of it ?) that backing away from the issue of addressing (and correcting?) the issue of computer vote fraud (and media monopoly co-ordination of propaganda)... truly makes violence VASTLY more likely.