Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Alberta's Child; Yaelle
I'll go a bit further. The writer breathlessly says

Even Rudy Giuliani, the President’s attorney, and Mark Meadows, the President’s Chief of Staff, seem hellbent on publicly keeping their distance from Powell -- and on keeping President Trump from getting too close to or aligned with Powell.

You are really saying Trump is weak, and being manipulated by Giuliani and Meadows. Huh?

Now, we all agree that Trump isn't an idiot (though his AG picks aren't a strong suit). We also acknowledge that, having worked in real estate in NewYork, he probably can pick out the charlatans from across the room.

Along comes Powell. Ok...she clearly has chutzpah and isn't afraid. But any attorney realizes part of a high-profile case is the public dimension, and she utterly failed in delivering that dimension. Her word-choice and interviews let the word Kracken to be turned into a club to be used to bludgeon herself by the enemies.

Maybe she's a good attorney - so is Dershowitz. But he flew on the Lolita express and is a rabid pro-abortion and anti-2nd Amendment guy...surely SOMEWHERE in the US we can find SOMEONE better than him. Same with Powell.

When that announcement came out that Powell wasn't part of Trump's official team, I was heartened. My guess is he saw what was happening and some other things behind the scenes, and cut his losses. Maybe she's competent, but he realized she was a liability.

I fully recognize the powers that are stacked against Trump and that state legislatures have failed the voters. If Joe is seated, it won't be for lack of effort. But I suspect part of the post-mortem will reveal Powell to not be as good as many believe.

32 posted on 12/26/2020 7:33:18 AM PST by DoodleBob (Gravity's waiting period is about 9.8 m/s^2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: DoodleBob
A big red flag was raised in my mind about Powell when she was doing her Tucker Carlson interview and insisted she wouldn’t share her evidence with him because she wasn’t going to try the case “in the court of public opinion.”

That was a disingenuous, phony stance to take ... because swaying public opinion was the only reason she was doing a stupid TV interview.

35 posted on 12/26/2020 7:41:06 AM PST by Alberta's Child ("There's somebody new and he sure ain't no rodeo man.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

To: DoodleBob

Have you read License to Lie?

Do tell.


36 posted on 12/26/2020 7:42:11 AM PST by sauropod (Cui bono? I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson