Sidney Powell says they have more than enough evidence to overturn the election.

[theHawk]

No one needs to attack her credibility. She has none. She is going to be lucky if she isn't looking at fraud and tampering charges when this is all over.
If she had any credible evidence, she'd have presented it and they'd be singing it from the rooftops. What they are trying to do is sow doubt. Because
the minute someone actually calls her on her bullshit, the game is over.

NONE of what you claimed is true. In a changing world you remain a dumb fuck with a big mouth.

Sure it is, remember her histrionics during the Flynn thing? She's just another tRump supporter with orange stained lips.

What "histrionics?" I saw here state the facts of Mueller's sleazy case.

And as it turned out Mueller’s “case” was complete bullshit.

 

[colfax_m]

If they had evidence, they would show it to the media.

The news media aren't interested in evidence. They are only interested in Biden.

The fact that they haven't shown any means that there is nothing there that will stand up to a modicum of scrutiny

A "modicum" is a veil — someone is hiding something. Modern news media have been told by their leftist bosses not to question or scrutinize the "official" AP/Reuters storyline.

Can I ask why you keep on talking about the media? Powell says she has plenty of evidence to overturn the election? Fine then present it. In the venue that is charged with ruling over evidence which is most definitely NOT the media. The fact that this is not happening leads me to pose certain questions. Stuff like. Why so vague? Why if you have such strong evidence, file such laughable evidence first? Evidence that is so meritless that it serves no purpose besides irritating judges? Why not be quick about filing that evidence since their is a time factor?

The lack of logic behind what is happening leads me to infer certain things. Things like. Someone who has a case, would not need to tout it in the media but would rather bring a lawsuit. Or things like. If their really is a strong case to overturn the election, those making the claim would have been able to articulate how exactly the election was stolen from them.

In my opinion, this isn’t about a court case. There are rules in court. Evidence has to be real. You can’t make shit up. You can’t say whatever you want. The courts won’t let Powell’s argument get very far. It’ll be tossed as quickly as everything else.

Powell’s goal is not to win a court case.

Powell just wants there to be enough doubt and public rancor about the election to give state legislatures, which Republicans control in most of the close states, to ignore the election results completely and just throw their electors to Trump.

It’s a battle of public opinion to pressure state legislatures.

 

[forkup]

If they had evidence, they would show it to the media. The fact that they haven't shown any means that there is nothing there that will stand up to a modicum of scrutiny

Why would they show a leftist media what they have? The mainstream news is part of the scam.

If they had actual evidence, they would present it in order to increase acceptance of their position. Keeping their "evidence" a secret would be counterproductive, since governing isn't possible with the acceptance of a majority of the public.
This isn't rocket science.

They have no obligation to show it to the media. That's all.

Maybe not, but they do have an obligation to the court to show their evidence. At least if the object is to actually overturn the election. It doesn't strike you as at all odd that this hasn't happened? I mean it is time sensitive. So far the Trump lawsuits haven't exactly gone great. Nor for that matter are the lawsuits filed about enough votes to affect the election result in any state.

It's kind of like trying to prove a murder by trying to prove the alleged murderer once dated the victims sister. Meaning even if you could prove it it doesn't get you anywhere near what you are alleging.

 

[Crepitus]

No one needs to attack her credibility. She has none. She is going to be lucky if she isn't looking at fraud and tampering charges when this is all over.
If she had any credible evidence, she'd have presented it and they'd be singing it from the rooftops. What they are trying to do is sow doubt. Because
the minute someone actually calls her on her bullshit, the game is over.

NONE of what you claimed is true. In a changing world you remain a dumb fuck with a big mouth.

Sure it is, remember her histrionics during the Flynn thing? She's just another tRump supporter with orange stained lips.

What "histrionics?" I saw here state the facts of Mueller's sleazy case.

And as it turned out Mueller’s “case” was complete bullshit.

Lol, only if you have orange stained lips.

 

[theHawk]

No one needs to attack her credibility. She has none. She is going to be lucky if she isn't looking at fraud and tampering charges when this is all over.
If she had any credible evidence, she'd have presented it and they'd be singing it from the rooftops. What they are trying to do is sow doubt. Because
the minute someone actually calls her on her bullshit, the game is over.

NONE of what you claimed is true. In a changing world you remain a dumb fuck with a big mouth.

Sure it is, remember her histrionics during the Flynn thing? She's just another tRump supporter with orange stained lips.

What "histrionics?" I saw here state the facts of Mueller's sleazy case.

And as it turned out Mueller’s “case” was complete bullshit.

Lol, only if you have orange stained lips.

Mueller found zero evidence for “collusion” with Russians or any Russian “interference” in our elections. Cry all you want, throw out any insults you want, it doesn’t change those facts.

 

[forkup]

If they had evidence, they would show it to the media.

The news media aren't interested in evidence. They are only interested in Biden.

The fact that they haven't shown any means that there is nothing there that will stand up to a modicum of scrutiny

A "modicum" is a veil — someone is hiding something. Modern news media have been told by their leftist bosses not to question or scrutinize the "official" AP/Reuters storyline.

Can I ask why you keep on talking about the media? Powell says she has plenty of evidence to overturn the election? Fine then present it. In the venue that is charged with ruling over evidence which is most definitely NOT the media. The fact that this is not happening leads me to pose certain questions. Stuff like. Why so vague? Why if you have such strong evidence, file such laughable evidence first? Evidence that is so meritless that it serves no purpose besides irritating judges? Why not be quick about filing that evidence since their is a time factor?

The lack of logic behind what is happening leads me to infer certain things. Things like. Someone who has a case, would not need to tout it in the media but would rather bring a lawsuit. Or things like. If their really is a strong case to overturn the election, those making the claim would have been able to articulate how exactly the election was stolen from them.

In my opinion, this isn’t about a court case. There are rules in court. Evidence has to be real. You can’t make shit up. You can’t say whatever you want. The courts won’t let Powell’s argument get very far. It’ll be tossed as quickly as everything else.

Powell’s goal is not to win a court case.

Powell just wants there to be enough doubt and public rancor about the election to give state legislatures, which Republicans control in most of the close states, to ignore the election results completely and just throw their electors to Trump.

It’s a battle of public opinion to pressure state legislatures.

I agree. Something by the way is an incredible cynical thing to do. If this happens in a place like Zimbabwe Western Democracies would send election observers. Most of us would think, " yea it's just Africa". Now this is happening in the US. With the full throated support of large sections of the country not to mention one of the major parties.

 

[JimH52]

And it is written on a match book that Rudy is carrying around in his back pocket....right next to the glossy photo of his Messiah....The Don....IDIOTS!

 

[Gary Lee]

No one needs to attack her credibility. She has none. She is going to be lucky if she isn't looking at fraud and tampering charges when this is all over.
If she had any credible evidence, she'd have presented it and they'd be singing it from the rooftops. What they are trying to do is sow doubt. Because
the minute someone actually calls her on her bullshit, the game is over.

NONE of what you claimed is true. In a changing world you remain a dumb fuck with a big mouth.

Sure it is, remember her histrionics during the Flynn thing? She's just another tRump supporter with orange stained lips.

What "histrionics?" I saw here state the facts of Mueller's sleazy case.

SO SAYETH ANOTHER INTELLECTUALLY CHALLENGED LIBERAL.

 

[Crepitus]

No one needs to attack her credibility. She has none. She is going to be lucky if she isn't looking at fraud and tampering charges when this is all over.
If she had any credible evidence, she'd have presented it and they'd be singing it from the rooftops. What they are trying to do is sow doubt. Because
the minute someone actually calls her on her bullshit, the game is over.

NONE of what you claimed is true. In a changing world you remain a dumb fuck with a big mouth.

Sure it is, remember her histrionics during the Flynn thing? She's just another tRump supporter with orange stained lips.

What "histrionics?" I saw here state the facts of Mueller's sleazy case.

And as it turned out Mueller’s “case” was complete bullshit.

Lol, only if you have orange stained lips.

Mueller found zero evidence for “collusion” with Russians or any Russian “interference” in our elections. Cry all you want, throw out any insults you want, it doesn’t change those facts.

That's a lie. I realize you're just repeating what you were told,. It that doesn't make it not a lie.

 

[Agit8r]

No one needs to attack her credibility. She has none. She is going to be lucky if she isn't looking at fraud and tampering charges when this is all over.
If she had any credible evidence, she'd have presented it and they'd be singing it from the rooftops. What they are trying to do is sow doubt. Because
the minute someone actually calls her on her bullshit, the game is over.

NONE of what you claimed is true. In a changing world you remain a dumb fuck with a big mouth.

Sure it is, remember her histrionics during the Flynn thing? She's just another tRump supporter with orange stained lips.

What "histrionics?" I saw here state the facts of Mueller's sleazy case.

And as it turned out Mueller’s “case” was complete bullshit.

Lol, only if you have orange stained lips.

Mueller found zero evidence for “collusion” with Russians or any Russian “interference” in our elections. Cry all you want, throw out any insults you want, it doesn’t change those facts.

If there was actually no wrongdoing, there would be no need to exert influence. Therefore it is obvious that wrongdoing took place. Nixon had to resign because of being caught in exactly such a connundrum. But in those days both parties had some degree of probity.

 

[forkup]

Cry all you want, throw out any insults you want, it doesn’t change those facts.

It seems you have a faulty memory. No worries Ill refresh.

Mueller found zero evidence for “collusion” with Russians

What the Mueller Report Says About Russian Contacts - FactCheck.org

The special counsel investigation "established multiple links between Trump Campaign officials and individuals tied to the Russian government." But it "did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.”

www.factcheck.org

https://pacer-documents.s3.amazonaws.com/36/193647/04516494589.pdf

Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agents assisting the Special Counsel’s Office assess that Person A has ties to a Russian intelligence service and had such ties in 2016. During his first interview with the Special Counsel’s Office, van der Zwaan admitted that he knew of that connection, stating that Gates told him Person A was a former Russian Intelligence Officer with the GRU.2

or any Russian “interference” in our elections.

People indicted by Mueller.
5-20) 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies were indicted on conspiracy charges, with some also being accused of identity theft. The charges related to a Russian propaganda effort designed to interfere with the 2016 campaign. The companies involved are the Internet Research Agency, often described as a “Russian troll farm,” and two other companies that helped finance it. The Russian nationals indicted include 12 of the agency’s employees and its alleged financier, Yevgeny Prigozhin.


23) Konstantin Kilimnik: This longtime business associate of Manafort and Gates, who’s currently based in Russia, was charged alongside Manafort with attempting to obstruct justice by tampering with witnesses in Manafort’s pending case last year.

24-35) 12 Russian GRU officers: These officers of Russia’s military intelligence service were charged with crimes related to the hacking and leaking of leading Democrats’ emails in 2016.

All of Robert Mueller’s indictments and plea deals in the Russia investigation

The investigation is now complete.

www.vox.com

I could give you the indictments themselves if you want.

 

[Orangecat]

Well, you have fun stormin the castle. I think you're going to find things a bit different this time around.

We took the castle years ago. It's you clowns on the outside who are worried Trump won't leave.

 

[Oddball]

No one needs to attack her credibility. She has none. She is going to be lucky if she isn't looking at fraud and tampering charges when this is all over.
If she had any credible evidence, she'd have presented it and they'd be singing it from the rooftops. What they are trying to do is sow doubt. Because
the minute someone actually calls her on her bullshit, the game is over.

NONE of what you claimed is true. In a changing world you remain a dumb fuck with a big mouth.

Sure it is, remember her histrionics during the Flynn thing? She's just another tRump supporter with orange stained lips.

What "histrionics?" I saw here state the facts of Mueller's sleazy case.

And as it turned out Mueller’s “case” was complete bullshit.

Lol, only if you have orange stained lips.

Mueller found zero evidence for “collusion” with Russians or any Russian “interference” in our elections. Cry all you want, throw out any insults you want, it doesn’t change those facts.

View attachment 417687
If there was actually no wrongdoing, there would be no need to exert influence. Therefore it is obvious that wrongdoing took place. Nixon had to resign because of being caught in exactly such a connundrum. But in those days both parties had some degree of probity.

then why wasn't the impeachment over that, genius?

 

[bripat9643]

No one needs to attack her credibility. She has none. She is going to be lucky if she isn't looking at fraud and tampering charges when this is all over.
If she had any credible evidence, she'd have presented it and they'd be singing it from the rooftops. What they are trying to do is sow doubt. Because
the minute someone actually calls her on her bullshit, the game is over.

NONE of what you claimed is true. In a changing world you remain a dumb fuck with a big mouth.

Sure it is, remember her histrionics during the Flynn thing? She's just another tRump supporter with orange stained lips.

What "histrionics?" I saw here state the facts of Mueller's sleazy case.

And as it turned out Mueller’s “case” was complete bullshit.

Lol, only if you have orange stained lips.

Mueller found zero evidence for “collusion” with Russians or any Russian “interference” in our elections. Cry all you want, throw out any insults you want, it doesn’t change those facts.

View attachment 417687
If there was actually no wrongdoing, there would be no need to exert influence. Therefore it is obvious that wrongdoing took place. Nixon had to resign because of being caught in exactly such a connundrum. But in those days both parties had some degree of probity.

Meaningles twaddle. "Exonerating" people is not a proper function of an prosecutor, moron. You've been told this 1000 times.

 

[Agit8r]

No one needs to attack her credibility. She has none. She is going to be lucky if she isn't looking at fraud and tampering charges when this is all over.
If she had any credible evidence, she'd have presented it and they'd be singing it from the rooftops. What they are trying to do is sow doubt. Because
the minute someone actually calls her on her bullshit, the game is over.

NONE of what you claimed is true. In a changing world you remain a dumb fuck with a big mouth.

Sure it is, remember her histrionics during the Flynn thing? She's just another tRump supporter with orange stained lips.

What "histrionics?" I saw here state the facts of Mueller's sleazy case.

And as it turned out Mueller’s “case” was complete bullshit.

Lol, only if you have orange stained lips.

Mueller found zero evidence for “collusion” with Russians or any Russian “interference” in our elections. Cry all you want, throw out any insults you want, it doesn’t change those facts.

View attachment 417687
If there was actually no wrongdoing, there would be no need to exert influence. Therefore it is obvious that wrongdoing took place. Nixon had to resign because of being caught in exactly such a connundrum. But in those days both parties had some degree of probity.

then why wasn't the impeachment over that, genius?

I suspect they were keeping it in their pocket in hope of a Democratic senate

 

[justinacolmena]

If their really is a strong case to overturn the election, those making the claim would have been able to articulate how exactly the election was stolen from them.

That burden is on the wrong side again. The Electors are charged with verifying the certification of the results of the election in each state, and transmitting their votes signed and sealed to Congress. That should not be too hard a burden to bear on the right side of the law.

The claim that a free and fair election was held in the midst of widespread rioting and pandemic of infectious disease is too absurd to take at face value without intense scrutiny.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

It will be fun watching the fake news try to attack her credibility. She has an impeccable reputation.

If true...let the peaceful riots of murder and thievery begin

 

[healthmyths]

It will be fun watching the fake news try to attack her credibility. She has an impeccable reputation.

No one needs to attack her credibility. She has none. She is going to be lucky if she isn't looking at fraud and tampering charges when this is all over.
If she had any credible evidence, she'd have presented it and they'd be singing it from the rooftops. What they are trying to do is sow doubt. Because
the minute someone actually calls her on her bullshit, the game is over.

Correct.

One cannot attack that which does not exist.

Then why are Democrats protesting so much? If truth is on their side then why are they fighting?

 

[healthmyths]

It will be fun watching the fake news try to attack her credibility. She has an impeccable reputation.

No one needs to attack her credibility. She has none. She is going to be lucky if she isn't looking at fraud and tampering charges when this is all over.
If she had any credible evidence, she'd have presented it and they'd be singing it from the rooftops. What they are trying to do is sow doubt. Because
the minute someone actually calls her on her bullshit, the game is over.

Well, if there is nothing there, why are you all so upset? If truth is on your side, Biden will be the President. So far he is not the President-Elect
as that is done by the Electoral college 12/14/20. So why are you so anxious? If truth is on your side you should at least be quiet about it and not protest. Is a famous writer once said "Methinks thou dost protest too much".

Who's "anxious"?

We're a bit weary of the scharade, disgusted might be a better word, but I don't think anyone here doubts the final outcome.

Then you shouldn't be protesting the election yourself. You are by making comments just adding to the fire. Relax and let the truth come out!

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

It will be fun watching the fake news try to attack her credibility. She has an impeccable reputation.

No one needs to attack her credibility. She has none. She is going to be lucky if she isn't looking at fraud and tampering charges when this is all over.
If she had any credible evidence, she'd have presented it and they'd be singing it from the rooftops. What they are trying to do is sow doubt. Because
the minute someone actually calls her on her bullshit, the game is over.

Correct.

One cannot attack that which does not exist.

Then why are Democrats protesting so much? If truth is on their side then why are they fighting?

Because this is an active attempt to undermine and subvert a legitimate election...because their man lost. So it must be "rigged". Sidney Powell has no evidence. If she did, she would have immediately brought it in front of a judge. But since she hasn't got any, one can only draw the conclusion that she and the rest of the Trump Dream Team are playing it up in hopes the spectre of it will last until the electors vote on December 14th. Because the minute they walk into court and present it, the game's over.