Posted on 11/19/2020 6:34:21 PM PST by MNDude
Its 4 and a half minutes long. He sure implies she's not honest.
(Excerpt) Read more at twitter.com ...
‘
Another part of this that the Media, including FOX, is mocking the idea that people that have signed affidavits will be attacked, if it’s made public.
Really. Smirking Talking heads act like that’s so crazy.
You’d have to be stupid enough to believe there’s no such thing as Antifa and Joe is ushering in decency to not understand there’s a standing army waiting to get the personal info of those people.
.
Yep.
THIS knowledge is precisely why Obama tried to bury Flynn in prison.
THIS is why Sidney said she was going to "release the kraken." She now has the keystone to reveal global corruption of elections worldwide of such a scale that it can topple governments.
THEY know it and SHE knows they know it.
THIS is why the media is instructed to studiously ignore everything from the Trump legal team. What they are poised to uncover/reveal is fatal to them and to the Democrat Party and more importantly, to Obama's power.
Sidney now carries in her brain the Death Star for the global left.
And there's nobody better, IMO.
Your fondest desire. Pathetic creature
How did Carlson miss it?
+++++
I’ve pretty much given up on Fox but I just can’t resist checking in with Tucker just to see what he is going to talk about. Freepers all know what the issue of the day is. NewsMax and Bannon do as well. If Tucker fails that test it is back to NewsMax for me. A couple of minutes.
But today he had the right topic. And he sounded like the old Tucker to me right up to when he started ranting about the lack of real evidence. Click. Back to NewsMax.
Bottom line: We are losing Tucker. I’m sure he heard Giuliani today. For Tucker this was inexcusable.
You don’t think it works that way?
No offense but, you think you know more about this than the high-powered lawyers assigned to this case by the President? Several of whom are former Justice Department Prosecutors and several of whom have argued before the Supreme Court?
You don’t seem to be responding in context of your post to which I responded. You wrote that ‘no court will have the guts to reverse an election’; and I wrote that we don’t HAVE an election result, yet.
judges weigh and decide upon actual evidence presented in court, not crap they hear in the media - or, at least, they’re supposed to do so.
And lawyers don’t give away all of their evidence before they’ve even gotten to court. As Rudy said today, judges probably wouldn’t be very happy about that.
Tucker knows. He is too smart not to understand she can’t give him or us the evidence he wants.
I don’t think he’s calling her a liar. He’s just demanding the evidence, which is also what the judges are going to do. Maybe she’s holding her evidence back until she gets in court. But if it never materializes then we’re fokked.
Tucker vs. Sidney Powell. I don’t like the sound of that at all. Whoever wins, we lose.
Exactly and he has that entitled, elite mindset.
Take your negative BS somewhere else.
Tucker knows this.
didn’t say she has to prove it on TV
I said she has to prove it.
Just step back from your preconceptions and think about the CIA/NSA
Do you REALLY believe that a program that they may have helped developed and used in foreign countries is going to see the light of day with a court deciding before Biden is certified.
It’s not going to happen,.
I know someone who had a State Tax Audit shut down by the Spooks because they weren’t allowed to see his info...or so the story goes. whatever went on he doesnt know..the audit was cancelled.
And that is just a low level off the books guy.
You guys don’t understand the Spook system if you think this is showing up in court before the end of the year
Laying the foundation, setting up the predicate, etc.
Time for him to dig out that old bow tie and start wearing it.
I think your acquaintance with lawyers is scant. Her job is to win. There is psych-ops, card playing, uncovering the dirt and presentation to make the strongest case. Convincing the public is a small part and giving away anything that can help the other side spike her cannons is not to be considered. We need to let the battle play out and not make POTUS & his team face fire from his supporters as well as the enemy.
You dont get to introduce new evidence when you stand before those 9 judges.
This could be a little different
I may have to borrow your “_ucker” reference in the future, if you don’t mind.
Excellent way to make it indefinite, yet naughty.
ooooo....such “inside” words 🙄
You are a fraud
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.