Posted on 12/03/2020 2:05:38 PM PST by Enlightened1
Nice try.
1) The timetable is set by applicable law, not me.
2) It’s going the way that is prescribed by law. Whether or not I like it is immaterial.
3) I do not blame Trump’s legal team.
4) The allegations of election fraud are not baseless. But they are subject to the Rules of Evidence.
Get it?
Produce it. Time’s a wasting.
I ask because you certainly never had time to go to and view the 24 minute video at the link. You saw the title and immediately responded without even reading the article or reviewing the video in this case.
I found your eagerness to post challenges without reviewing what was said, a bit inquisitive.
Do you honestly think that thread was the only one addressing this subject? There have been scores of them over the last week or so, and they are simply repetitive. In virtually every video or link by Powell or Wood they have said the same thing: “We have overwhelming evidence.” But neither of them have ever introduced any of that overwhelming evidence to a court of competent jurisdiction, other than attaching some affidavits. I’m annoyed because they are sounding suspiciously like Adam Schiff with his myriad statements about having “overwhelming evidence” of Trump colluding with Russia in the 2016 election, when all the time Schiff had squat, and he knew it. Schiff was trying his case in the court of public opinion; but, at least Powell and Wood have filed SOMETHING with the courts, though nothing thus far that has any persuasive weight.
Let me tell you something about witness affidavits: Half will ignore a subpoena and will not show up for deposition or cross examination; most of the other half will be impeached by a skilled attorney at questioning. That leaves perhaps a handful that MIGHT pass the smell test. Then, the other side gets to introduce THEIR witnesses, and the process repeats. So, a court will say, “Gee, both sides have a couple witnesses that cancel out each other. Absent any other evidence before the court I am going to rule that the moving party (the party that initiated the claim in the first place) has not proved their case by a preponderance of the evidence (the standard in civil, NOT criminal cases.), and I will dismiss their case (with or without prejudice, but generally with). Sine die.
I see, so Powell and Trumps legal Team sound like Adam Schiff and, strictly based on your comments, they're essentially peddling a load of BS, like Adam Schiff.
Would that also include Trump, since he's repeatedly said the same thing?
“I see, so Powell and Trumps legal Team sound like Adam Schiff and, strictly based on your comments, they’re essentially peddling a load of BS, like Adam Schiff.”
Uh, Powell is NOT part of Trump’s legal team, and neither is Wood. They have made NO court filings on behalf of Trump or his official campaign. And this whole thread has been about Powell and Wood, and NOT about TRUMP’s legal team, so stop trying to conflate the two, which is, by the way, a tactic straight out of Alinsky. Yup, I read Alinsky years before you were even born, as I have always believed it is smart to know and anticipate one’s enemies.
And as for Giuliani and Ellis and DiGenova, they have in fact publically distanced themselves from both Powell and Wood.
You need to quit before you make more of an ass of yourself than you already have.
Gezuz...Do you have difficulties reading? See the word and???
"I see, so Powell *and* Trumps legal Team"
I see, so Powell AND Trumps legal Team sound like Adam Schiff and, strictly based on your comments, they're essentially peddling a load of BS, like Adam Schiff.
Would that also include Trump, since he's repeatedly said the same thing?
_________________________________________
Stop ducking dodging and evading and answer the question above.
they’ve been in court...they’ve presented sound evidence....where the H have you been....
The courts, so far, are not accepting the evidence or affidavits. Where the F have you been?
Trump has repeatedly stated, "The evidence of fraud is overwhelming."
Once again, since you compared Powell and Wood as sounding like Adam Schiff for their comments about, "Overwhelming evidence", my question to you is, does Trump also sound like Adam Schiff to you since he's made the same comments?
??
And did you even read my comment? I specifically delineated between Powell/Wood and the Trump team.
Are you simple?
Where I come from, it would be said of someone like you, “Well, isn’t he special!”
You really ARE simple.
You said: “I see, so Powell and Trumps legal Team sound like Adam Schiff and, strictly based on your comments, they’re essentially peddling a load of BS, like Adam Schiff.” But, if you were not a functional illiterate, you clearly would have read that I said: “In virtually every video or link by Powell or Wood they have said the same thing: ‘We have overwhelming evidence.’ But neither of them have ever introduced any of that overwhelming evidence to a court of competent jurisdiction, other than attaching some affidavits. I’m annoyed because they are sounding suspiciously like Adam Schiff with his myriad statements about having “overwhelming evidence” of Trump colluding with Russia in the 2016 election, when all the time Schiff had squat, and he knew it. Schiff was trying his case in the court of public opinion; but, at least Powell and Wood have filed SOMETHING with the courts, though nothing thus far that has any persuasive weight.” NOWHERE did I even mention Trump’s team! But, as I said before, you are pulling the old Alinsky tactic of co-mingling (that’s a common term in law, too, by the way) subjects in order to avoid an unpleasant truth, and thus seek to negate the validity of the original premise. As I said before, I read Alinsky before you were even born.
We’re done here. You are not even close to a worthy opponent. In short, you bore me.
But Trump has also repeatedly stated, "The evidence of fraud is overwhelming."
My question once again to you, which you've repeatedly evaded is, does Trump also sound like Adam Schiff to you since he said the same thing about having overwhelming evidence?
Heading for the tall grass already? Just answer the question above before running off. Thanks!
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.