Now about the Dominion fraud that Sidney Powell is pursuing, I submit the image below to explain my own understanding of what may be going on with Dominion. Welcome FReeper comments on this...
Posted on 11/24/2020 3:58:58 AM PST by Kaslin
Rudy Giuliani, President Trump’s personal lawyer, explained why the Trump campaign released a statement on Sunday distancing itself from attorney Sidney Powell.
“I think it’s because we’re pursuing two different theories,” Giuliani told Fox Business host Lou Dobbs. “Our theory of the case to get to the Supreme Court, now in four places, and it’s soon going to be in two others, and there will be an overall lawsuit, is basically misconduct of the election by state officials in at least five or six different states in which the misconduct of the election involved deprivation of constitutional rights for the President.”
Giuliani argued there were discrepancies across states with regard to curing, for example, which allows the voter to fix their ballot over something like a missing signature so it can still be counted. The former New York City mayor said in one part of the state, a Democratic part, this was allowed, while in another, it wasn’t. He also pointed to examples of “misconduct” in Pennsylvania and Michigan.
“We have evidence,” he said. “The evidence has been presented, and the media lies that we have no evidence. They're just too lazy to read our 100 affidavits, which are on the public record, from American citizens.”
The campaign announced the split with Powell on Sunday, noting “she is practicing law on her own” and is “not a member of the Trump Legal Team.” The statement came days after Powell appeared alongside Trump campaign lawyers at a Republican National Committee press conference where she alleged massive fraud through voting systems. Dominion has disputed her claims, saying it’s “physically impossible” to switch votes in the manner she has alleged.
In response, Powell vowed to carry on her fight.
“My intent has always been to expose all the fraud I could find and let the chips fall where they may–whether it be upon Republicans or Democrats,” she said in a statement, adding that her evidence is “overwhelming” and she plans to file a lawsuit this week. “It will be epic.”
I have no links and cannot recall the guys name, but a few minutes ago, watching OAN, Chanel Rion interviewed a guy that has been funding research into Dominion since 2018 Texas election fraud and has tons of evidence against Dominion on 3 levels. The sad part is he went to the DHS long before the election and was ignored. He’s sharing it with Powell and Trump’s team.
The bad news is it’s like Powell said, the evidence is so massive and so much is coming in that it may not be organized into a lawsuit before deadlines. And I think that’s why Trump split off from Dominion research to allow two separate paths.
“I think it’s because we’re pursuing two different theories,” Giuliani told Fox Business host Lou Dobbs.
____________________________________
It would seem like a poor choice of words to use ‘theory’ in this context.
And for American citizens? The voters? Equal protection?
I voted absentee from abroad which included jumping through several hoops.
Mail in ballots received unsolicited ballots, a postage paid envelope, and good to go.
Were those technically "absentee ballots" which didn't meet any legislative standard (per Constitution) that could pass SCOTUS muster?
Battle on two fronts, must be driving the idiots mad
Rudy’s theory is half-baked unless he recognizes that Powell is on to something real.
Rudy made a mistake. Let the crooks fall where they may, be they Republimechanics or Demoncraps.
This is unlikely was a decision made by the Donald. Its a blind decision. The Donald does not make blind decisions.He usua;;y makes them with his eyes wide open.
Now about the Dominion fraud that Sidney Powell is pursuing, I submit the image below to explain my own understanding of what may be going on with Dominion. Welcome FReeper comments on this...
RIGHT !
Giuliani should not speak of “THEORIES” if he have clues and facts !
Sydney POWELL doesn’t use that word ! And her stance is completly consistant with the whole picture as we can see it by different sources .
I am following her 100% . In addition it needs courage and stamina to stand firm on that stance .
Many “men” should learn something here
“Theory” is the proper term, legally. It means the theory of the case, or why the facts represent a violation of US law, whether the constitution, laws, or regulations.
And “I think” is a giant hedge.
Your image didn’t come through.
When I see these threads on these legal challenges I immediately think of my last time on a jury a few years ago. It was a civil case involving a car accident. The plaintiff was some foreign dude who needed a translator when he was on the stand. There was no dispute about assigning fault in the case. The other driver was 100% at fault.
The plaintiff’s lawyers introduced mountains of evidence to support their claim that the guy had sustained a permanent back injury — all kinds of herniated discs, bulging discs, displaced discs, etc.
I could tell from the docket number of the case that it had been filed FIVE YEARS earlier, and I knew from experience that the insurance company for the at-fault driver had probably offered a boatload of money to settle out of court.
The one problem the guy had with the jury was that all the medical evidence in the world didn’t come close to proving to us that he had actually sustained any injuries in the car accident. He admitted under cross-examination that he had been a competitive weightlifter earlier in his life, and that he had been involved in at least one prior accident where he had been injured but never sought medical attention.
The jury was out for about 15 minutes before we came back and awarded him $0.
The word “theory” is a legal term used to describe the underlying foundation of the case — i.e., is this a voter fraud case, a civil rights case, a personal injury case? Etc., etc. It has nothing to do with fact patterns and evidence.
Richard Ramsland of Allied Security Operations Group
Three of the attorneys on the Bush legal team -- John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett -- now sit on the U.S. Supreme Court.
In his book about losing, Gore write that each time he went to court, the Bush lawyers had already been there.....always a step ahead of him.
The brilliant legal moves on behalf of Bush were being made by James Baker, a onetime Secy of State.
I'm a bit wary......the Trump team seems to be using he self-same legal arguments used in the Bush/Gore fiasco that it was a violation of the “one man, one vote” to only partially count and SINCE they couldn’t count the whole state of Florida, Gore’s partial recount was invalid.
Do they justices want to go there, again?
NOTE: When the USSC ordered the Bush/Gore count to be stopped, it seemed more like the USSC’s acknowledgement of Democrats’ proclivities to count, recount, then count again, till they had the necessary votes to win.
That struck me too. It makes the effort sound like an academic exercise instead of a law suit.
He should be outraged and ready to show harm to the American citizens.
BACKSTORY A local Republican candidate sued to (A) stop the practice and (B) for the ballots not to be counted, both on the state law claim, and, (C) because, (drum roll please) citing Bush v. Gore, in the FLA mess, it’s a “federal equal protection violation” for some voters to be notified about curing their ballots while not notifying others.
The Judge reviewing ballot counting in suburban Philadelphia county questioned the fairness of blocking voters from correcting mistakes on their ballots. “So what happens to my vote?” the judge asked. It could be “potentially disqualified,” he was told “But I was never given the opportunity” to fix it, Judge Savage responded. “I am losing my vote.”
============================
(h/t Alberta’s Child) The answer to the judge should have been: “The measures taken to fix or cure the defects in your ballot are illegal under state law; there are 66 other counties in this state where the voters DIDN’T get a chance to fix or cure defects in their ballots and the reason why is because election officials obeyed the law and didn’t contact them.”
BACKSTORY A local Republican candidate sued to (A) stop the practice and (B) for the ballots not to be counted, both on the state law claim, and, (C) because, (drum roll please) citing Bush v. Gore, in the FLA mess, it’s a “federal equal protection violation” for some voters to be notified about curing their ballots while not notifying others.
The Judge reviewing ballot counting in suburban Philadelphia county questioned the fairness of blocking voters from correcting mistakes on their ballots. “So what happens to my vote?” the judge asked. It could be “potentially disqualified,” he was told “But I was never given the opportunity” to fix it, Judge Savage responded. “I am losing my vote.”
============================
(h/t Alberta’s Child) The answer to the judge should have been: “The measures taken to fix or cure the defects in your ballot are illegal under state law; there are 66 other counties in this state where the voters DIDN’T get a chance to fix or cure defects in their ballots and the reason why is because election officials obeyed the law and didn’t contact them.”
The proper legal term is not in this case what should be proclaimed to the public.
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.