Trump Lawyer Sidney Powell: I Didn’t Provide Evidence to Tucker Carlson Because He Was ‘Rude’

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  john-russell  •  2 weeks ago  •  140 comments

Trump Lawyer Sidney Powell: I Didn’t Provide Evidence to Tucker Carlson Because He Was ‘Rude’
“We invited Sidney Powell on this show, we would’ve given her the whole hour, we would’ve given her the entire week and listen quietly the whole time at rapt attention—that is a big story,” he declared. “But she never sent us any evidence despite a lot of requests, polite requests. Not a page. When we kept pressing she got angry and told us to stop contacting her. When we checked with others around the Trump campaign, people with positions of authority, they told us Powell has never given...

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Trump Lawyer Sidney Powell: I Didn’t Provide Evidence to Tucker Carlson Because He Was ‘Rude’

Trump campaign lawyer Sidney Powell loudly complained on Friday morning about Fox News host Tucker Carlson calling her out for not presenting any evidence to back up her baseless election-fraud allegations, claiming she told him not to contact her again because he was “very insulting, demanding, and rude.” Carlson, who up until Thursday night had credulously amplified Team Trump’s voter fraud conspiracies, raised eyebrows when he kicked off his Thursday program by casting doubt on Powell’s outlandish claims that a cabal of “international leftists”—which includes long-deceased Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez—had stolen millions of Trump votes via corrupted software.

Hours after the Trump legal team’s unhinged press conference that not only featured Powell’s crazed conspiracies but a sweaty Rudy Giuliani acting out My Cousin Vinny while hair product dripped down his cheeks, Carlson noted that Powell had been making those same claims for days, prompting him to reach out to her this past Sunday. “What Powell was describing would amount to the single greatest crime in American history,” he stated. “Millions of votes stolen in the day. Democracy destroyed, the end of our centuries-old system of self-government, not a small thing.” After adding a bunch of disclaimers and caveats about how he didn’t dismiss her allegations out of hand and that his program is solely focused on seeking the truth, Carlson then explained to his viewers that Powell was unwilling to provide him any proof to back her supposedly bombshell accusations.
“We invited Sidney Powell on this show, we would’ve given her the whole hour, we would’ve given her the entire week and listen quietly the whole time at rapt attention—that is a big story,” he declared. “But she never sent us any evidence despite a lot of requests, polite requests. Not a page. When we kept pressing she got angry and told us to stop contacting her. When we checked with others around the Trump campaign, people with positions of authority, they told us Powell has never given them any evidence of either, nor has she provided any today at the press conference.”

Carlson also seemed to anticipate a backlash from angry MAGA fans for apparently turning his back on Trump’s coup attempt, adding: “We’re telling you this because it’s true. In the end, that’s all that matters, the truth. It’s our only hope, it’s our best defense. It’s how we are different from them. We care what’s true and we know you care too. That’s why we told you.”
Appearing on the Fox Business Network program hosted by Maria Bartiromo—one of the biggest boosters of Trump’s voter-fraud conspiracy theories—Powell insisted that she wasn’t mad when Carlson pressed her for evidence.“No, I didn’t get angry with the request to provide evidence,” she insisted on Friday morning. “In fact, I sent an affidavit to Tucker that I had not even attached to a pleading yet to help him understand the situation, and I offered him another witness who could explain the mathematics and the statistical evidence far better than I can. I’m not really a numbers person.”
The QAnon-sympathetic attorney then grumbled about Carlson’s attitude during their exchanges, claiming that was the reason she stopped responding to his requests.“But he was very insulting, demanding, and rude, and I told him not to contact me again, in those terms,” she concluded.

While Fox News has come under fire from Trumpworld since the network’s early call of Arizona for President-elect Joe Biden, which has prompted Trump to urge his supporters to abandon Fox for far-right alternatives Newsmax and One America News, Carlson had largely remained unscathed in the eyes of MAGA nation.

That is, until now.“Tucker wants to be some holy high priest now. Bow to Tucker. He can dispense holy communion,” far-right conspiracy theorist Mike Cernovich grumbled on Twitter. “Spare us future monologues on realpolitik. The left always lies, they dox, they kill. Giving benefit of the doubt to Sidney Powell is hardly some deadly sin. I’ll wait and see.”

Former Republican congressional candidate Angela Stanton King, a QAnon adherent who had previously been a frequent Fox guest, said she was taking Powell’s word over Carlson’s, mocking the Fox News host over his claim that UPS temporarily lost his coveted Hunter Biden documents   .— Angela Stanton King 🇺🇸 (@theangiestanton


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
JohnRussell
1  seeder  JohnRussell    2 weeks ago

Sidney Powell is alleging the greatest political crime in American history, maybe in world history.   It is her responsibility to present her evidence immediately.  She doesn't do so because she doesn't have any. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago

That is a quote from Tucker Carlson, How about some quotation marks?

And an A for honest Journalism for Carlson while you're at it.

 
 
 
Gsquared
1.1.1  Gsquared  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1    2 weeks ago

Do you Admit there is no evidence for Trump's phony election fraud conspiracy allegations?  That would be honest.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
1.1.2  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1    2 weeks ago

What, Carlson gets an "A" because this lie was a bridge to far even for him....? 

Boy does that speak volumes of how low the bar is set for conservative urinalism.

 

 
 
 
Dulay
1.1.3  Dulay  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @1.1.2    2 weeks ago

How much do you want to bet that if Powell had sent over a list of names of 'witnesses' and said she would present her evidence LIVE ON CAMERA, Tucker would have jumped at that shit and given her his whole hour to weave her web of delusional machinations? 

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
1.1.4  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Dulay @1.1.3    2 weeks ago

No bet Dulay...... Sure thing!

Powell is just another of the Trump court jesters.....

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1    2 weeks ago

These shysters representing tRump got nothin!

 
 
 
cjcold
1.2  cjcold  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago

Pretty sure that caring about bottom feeders is beyond my capacity.

 
 
 
Kavika
2  Kavika     2 weeks ago

''Because he was rude''...Oh, please spare me the BS.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
2.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Kavika @2    2 weeks ago

Good thing Trump is NEVER RUDE !

 
 
 
dennis smith
2.1.1  dennis smith  replied to  igknorantzrulz @2.1    2 weeks ago

Trump is an angel compared to at least a few on the NT left.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
2.1.2  igknorantzrulz  replied to  dennis smith @2.1.1    2 weeks ago
Trump is an angel

as am i, and you know who else was an Angle/// LEWCIFUR !!

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
2.1.3  FLYNAVY1  replied to  dennis smith @2.1.1    2 weeks ago

Again..... another low bar for what should be an example to the world living in the WH.

 
 
 
lady in black
3  lady in black    2 weeks ago

Another in a long line of delusional deporables.  If this idiot had ANY REAL proof, it would be in court by now.  Last I read she claims that the proof will be revealed in 2 weeks, sure it will be jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Gsquared
3.1  Gsquared  replied to  lady in black @3    2 weeks ago

Remember, everything in Trump world will always be revealed "in 2 weeks".

 
 
 
Ender
3.1.1  Ender  replied to  Gsquared @3.1    2 weeks ago

Still waiting on rudy's big bombshell about Hunter.

 
 
 
Gsquared
3.1.2  Gsquared  replied to  Ender @3.1.1    2 weeks ago

Still waiting for Trump's healthcare plan.  (Not really)

Heck, still waiting for the press conference about Melania's immigration status that Trump promised in "a couple of weeks"... in 2016!

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  Gsquared @3.1.2    2 weeks ago

yeah, and I am still waiting to see that $2500 savings per year in health insurance, too, along with that evidence of Russia/Trump collusion that was promised!

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.1.4  Gordy327  replied to  Gsquared @3.1    2 weeks ago
Remember, everything in Trump world will always be revealed "in 2 weeks".

Just like Covid will just go away. Oh wait....

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
3.1.5  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.3    2 weeks ago

your weight, is too heavy, pants on Fire, also known as possibly a liar, when it comes to your debunked (By Sandy) non $2500 savings, cause if it weren't for Obamacare, HOW do you know you DIDN'T save that $2500, as U know NOT what your increases would have been without Obamacare. 

The argument that there was KNOW Russia / Trump Collusion is for many, including YOU, just another Grand Illusion and evidence of more damn Delusion cause 199 were charged and some being some CLOSEST to Trump, and or his sordid sisterhooded family. Jared and Trumps son , (there ought top be a LAW) meeting in Trump tower with the RUSSIANS about "adoption issues"....please, pass the economy box of tissues if N E R truly B leaving that BULLSHIT. Muellers' investigation gathered an ENORMOUS amount of evidence, but due to LIARS and the LIAR in CHIEF, who was too m,uch a pussy for him to grab, and bring forth to TESTIFY IN PERSON, as we all knoe=w, Trump NEVER LIES BOUT N E THING, the evidence was not deemed quite enuff (YET, ONLY BY THE GOP"S in Trumpers faces,as they R corrupt and refused to even censor MR. Sensitives shaved un-masked faces)

cause due to LIES and OMISSIONS too left out for the commisions, DOES NOT PROVE TRUMP NOT GUILTY, just proves the GOP, is led and Governed by pussies that  constantly put Trump and Party about our DAMN USA. 

So Trump forgoty about his Billion(s) dollars dealing in MOSCOW...

TRumppy ha never attacked or even mentioned negatyive things about Putins' Russia cept a weak very few, and NEVER mentioned or condemned the BOUNTIES ON OUR SERVICE MAN AND WOMEN, and that is the ULTIMATE LOW BLOW to them and US !   Now the ORANGE CLOWN refuses to step down and/or share with a REAL POTUS. Continues to peddle LIES about a stolen election, a non existent virus (U know, the Democratic HOAX infection) as he undermines our election process, putting DOUBT in peopples minds, While NO EVIDENCE that could CHANGE the outcome has bin found, HE AND CRONIES continue to LIE, and it is just WRONG on so many levels. 

HOW

the HELL 

do U continue to B Leave ANY, N ALL of the LIES Trump says and spreads each and every day? Cause Trump and TRUTH, are NOT synonymous , and as far aware as you can spare,tired is those who sleep awake, wear Truth that doesn't fit, to Trump, is just  dEMOCRATIC, HOAX, FAKE ~.....NEWS O SHIT.  

Yet , with preponderance of evidence, YOU SEE NOTHING ! take off the blinders, and see straight, cause our country HAS become ,SEWER GRATE !

N it HAS BEEN TRUMP, that brought forth this fate

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  igknorantzrulz @3.1.5    2 weeks ago

Sandy debunked bupkis.

Piss on the media for spreading the lie you believe about Russia/Trump collusion which even the highly-vaunted Mueller could not corroborate.

Piss on people stupid enough even today to still believe it.

No reply necessary, as I have no desire to wade through any more word salads.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
3.1.7  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.6    2 weeks ago
esire to wade through any more word salads.

u just like tossin em' out there , yet have not a pear in your fruit of the looms , that is smarter than the Trumpp Le gummes , who follow the cult chored liter, who shoves quarts aside for his own damn pathetic pride

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.8  Texan1211  replied to  igknorantzrulz @3.1.7    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
3.1.9  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.8    2 weeks ago

so your sayin you N joy the water and vinegar dressin, i thought so...

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  igknorantzrulz @3.1.9    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
r.t..b...
3.1.11  r.t..b...  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.8    2 weeks ago

If it weren’t for the consistent abuse of pronouns and demands for personal clarification, née gratification, the irrational number of posts offering absolutely nothing to further any discussion would appropriately cease and desist. 
Less is more, Tex...less is more. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.12  Texan1211  replied to  r.t..b... @3.1.11    2 weeks ago

If you read where I demanded something, quote me.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
3.1.13  r.t..b...  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.12    2 weeks ago

Please.

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.14  Texan1211  replied to  r.t..b... @3.1.13    2 weeks ago

Yep, just what I figured--an unsubstantiated claim that got challenged and you can;t back it up.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
3.1.15  r.t..b...  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.14    2 weeks ago

Do go on...with every specious retort the  original premise is confirmed. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.16  Texan1211  replied to  r.t..b... @3.1.15    2 weeks ago

why are you replying?

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
3.1.17  FLYNAVY1  replied to  r.t..b... @3.1.15    2 weeks ago

Some can't even tell when they're being made fun of through their own posts.

Not very sporting of you rt.b........

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
3.1.18  igknorantzrulz  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @3.1.17    2 weeks ago

HEY, once in a while i figure it out...

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
3.1.19  igknorantzrulz  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @3.1.17    2 weeks ago

HEY, TWICE in a while i figure it out...

 
 
 
Raven Wing
3.1.20  Raven Wing  replied to  igknorantzrulz @3.1.19    2 weeks ago

Aw Iggy, you are much smarter than most people think. jrSmiley_79_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Raven Wing
3.1.21  Raven Wing  replied to  igknorantzrulz @3.1.5    2 weeks ago

Very well stated Iggy. And so very true. Thank you. jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.22  Texan1211  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @3.1.17    2 weeks ago

Feel free to back his claim up since he can't.

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.23  Tessylo  replied to  Raven Wing @3.1.20    2 weeks ago

It takes intelligence and wit to appreciate Iggy's posts.  

We know who doesn't have the mental agility to appreciate them.  

 
 
 
Gsquared
4  Gsquared    2 weeks ago

If she thinks Tucker Carlson was rude, wait until she gets in front of a judge with her ridiculous arguments and NO evidence.

 
 
 
Dulay
4.1  Dulay  replied to  Gsquared @4    2 weeks ago

They've already had issues with Judges all over the country. Judges who have the audacity to ask for evidence. Even Rudy had to admit under oath that the case he was arguing in Pennsylvania was 'not a fraud case'. So WTF is it and WTF is the POINT? 

I read the THIRD revision of the filing. It's comical. NO evidence, all innuendo. That they would actually file that bullshit in a Federal court is unconscionable. 

I thought that I had seen the epitome of argle-bargle when I read some of Session's DOJ filings, but the crap that Rudy is filing takes the cake. 

 
 
 
Gsquared
4.1.1  Gsquared  replied to  Dulay @4.1    2 weeks ago

I can tell you for a fact that state court judges can be very harsh if they don't like what is going on in their courtrooms, but federal court judges can be absolutely BRUTAL.

 
 
 
Dulay
4.1.2  Dulay  replied to  Gsquared @4.1.1    2 weeks ago

I don't think most Americans understand just how powerful Judges really are. They are 'kings/queens' in their courtrooms. They lay down the rules and can have you put behind bars at will if they even 'perceive' that you have violated them. They're can be tyrannical if they so choose.  

 
 
 
Gsquared
4.1.3  Gsquared  replied to  Dulay @4.1.2    2 weeks ago

That is true, although I have never been in a courtroom where the judge put anyone in jail for contempt.

I will never forget one time where an attorney was not wearing a tie in court, and after the judge was done ruling on his motion, the judge laid into him hard.  The attorney made an excuse about it being a Monday morning and he had just come directly  from a weekend out of town, but the judge really let him have it for not being in proper attire in his courtroom. 

I was in one case where the opposition attorney did not stand when addressing the Court.   He asked permission to sit, but he did not have any obvious disability nor did he give a reason.  The judge said "Sure".  I could tell he didn't like it.  The judge was almost gleeful when he was ruling against the guy's client.  Huge mistake.  Of course, his arguments were losing ones anyways.  Unless the judge tells you that you may be seated, or to remain seated after arguments have begun, you stand when addressing the Court.

I have seen other judges dress people down quite harshly for various reasons, usually having to do with the substance of their argument or the way they are handling their case. It is always advisable to very deferential with the judge, even if disagreeing with the judge's ruling.  And when the judge is done, even if he rules against your client, always say "Thank you, You Honor".

 
 
 
Dulay
4.1.4  Dulay  replied to  Gsquared @4.1.3    2 weeks ago

Once I was on a Federal EEOC case [as a paralegal] when a witness, called by the plaintiff, stated that after he was subpoenaed, the Agency 'investigator' called him and started interrogating him. I thought that the Judge was going to jump off the bench. She said "He did WHAT?" and proceeded to ask the witness questions about the conversation. After lunch, the 'investigator' for the Agency was no longer in the court room. Hmmm...

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5  seeder  JohnRussell    2 weeks ago

She has promoted a Q Anon point of view in the past. Of course she is a crackpot. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
6  sandy-2021492    2 weeks ago
“Tucker wants to be some holy high priest now. Bow to Tucker. He can dispense holy communion,” far-right conspiracy theorist Mike Cernovich grumbled on Twitter. “Spare us future monologues on realpolitik. The left always lies, they dox, they kill. Giving benefit of the doubt to Sidney Powell is hardly some deadly sin. I’ll wait and see.”

Wait, did he just imply that Tucker Carlson is part of the left?  The left isn't a part of this conversation.  This is conservatives asking for evidence from other conservatives, and not getting it.  Apparently, recognizing that no evidence has been presented now moves one to the left side of the political aisle.  Interesting.

Kudos to Tucker Carlson (and yes, those words really stick in my craw) for telling it like it is in this case.

 
 
 
Ender
6.1  Ender  replied to  sandy-2021492 @6    2 weeks ago

He kinda backtracked a little. Saying that he believes what she said could happen.

That cernovich sounds like a real piece of shit.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
7  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom    2 weeks ago

Pardon my French, but I've had it!  I have just fucking had it.  Are these people so easily fooled that they are willing to throw their careers away while doing Donald Trump's bidding?  I guess they are, and you know what?  I don't give a shit what happens to them.

 
 
 
Ender
7.1  Ender  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @7    2 weeks ago

I have had it with the crackpots that believe all the nonsense. They will now believe this loon and turn on one of their favorite tv blowhards.

Then again, it is kinda funny watching carlson squirm being bitten by what he helped create.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
7.1.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  Ender @7.1    2 weeks ago
Then again, it is kinda funny watching carlson squirm being, bitten by what he helped create.

Yup, sounds like those fleas are biting hard.

 
 
 
MUVA
7.2  MUVA  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @7    2 weeks ago

Guess what  you are going to see more of it for the next 4 years so you better get used to it.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
7.2.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  MUVA @7.2    2 weeks ago

So, you're admitting that there are some really stupid and gullible people among Trump's die-hard supporters, so devoid of sense and dignity that they're willing to go down with the ship?  Tell us something we don't know.

 
 
 
MUVA
7.2.2  MUVA  replied to  sandy-2021492 @7.2.1    2 weeks ago

No I'm telling the person I was responding to there will be more. The precedent has been set over the last 4 years partisanship at all cost by the leftist democrats has divided the country there will be no civility given or deserved. 

 
 
 
Ender
7.2.3  Ender  replied to  MUVA @7.2.2    2 weeks ago

Comical acting like the right wing never caused division...

For some it is like the Obama years never existed...

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
7.2.4  sandy-2021492  replied to  MUVA @7.2.2    2 weeks ago

Except Sister made no mention of civility.  Her post was entirely about their gullibility and tenaciousness in hanging on to a sinking ship.  You said there would be more of that.  We all agree here, but I don't think you like that.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
7.2.5  sandy-2021492  replied to  Ender @7.2.3    2 weeks ago
For some it is like the Obama years

Or the Clinton impeachment, when they were so determined to bring him down that they had to resort to getting him for lying about a BJ, because they couldn't make anything else stick.

 
 
 
MUVA
7.2.6  MUVA  replied to  sandy-2021492 @7.2.4    2 weeks ago

Look you can go argue with some else I'm going to make my comments and put you back on ignore thanks in advance.

 
 
 
MUVA
7.2.7  MUVA  replied to  MUVA @7.2.6    2 weeks ago

That's better.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
7.2.8  sandy-2021492  replied to  MUVA @7.2.6    2 weeks ago

Looks like you painted yourself into a corner.  Again.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
7.2.9  r.t..b...  replied to  sandy-2021492 @7.2.8    2 weeks ago

Finger painting, indeed.
Using only two middle fingers...and less concerned about the big picture and totally ignorant of the mess made and who will be left to clean it up...kindergartners on parade. 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
7.2.10  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  sandy-2021492 @7.2.8    2 weeks ago
Looks like you painted yourself into a corner.  Again.

It's amazing.  There is not even a blip of understanding.  Nothing, nada, zero, zilch, bupkis, sub-trifling, diddly squat, jack fucking shit, bumdiddly, 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
7.2.11  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  sandy-2021492 @7.2.8    2 weeks ago
I'm going to make my comments and put you back on ignore thanks in advance.

If you need help with your grief, let me know.  I'm here for you. jrSmiley_93_smiley_image.jpg

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
7.2.12  sandy-2021492  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @7.2.11    2 weeks ago

jrSmiley_15_smiley_image.gif Well, if it weren't for your support, I'd be falling apart right now.  I'm just devastated.

 
 
 
MAGA
7.2.13  MAGA  replied to  MUVA @7.2.2    2 weeks ago

You got that right.  Only total and complete partisan opposition to each and every single one of the things that sub human thing some call president elect tries to do that can’t get 60 votes in the senate.  

 
 
 
MAGA
7.2.14  MAGA  replied to  Ender @7.2.3    2 weeks ago

The Bush 43 years brought upon the Obama response just like the Trump years will bring about the treatment Biden receives during his 2-4 years..

 
 
 
MAGA
7.2.15  MAGA  replied to  MUVA @7.2.6    2 weeks ago

That’s a great idea!  

 
 
 
Ender
7.2.16  Ender  replied to  MAGA @7.2.14    2 weeks ago

That makes zero sense, as usual....

 
 
 
dennis smith
7.2.17  dennis smith  replied to  MUVA @7.2.6    2 weeks ago

Good call MUVA. I have done the same. 

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
7.2.18  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Ender @7.2.16    2 weeks ago

Seems to be getting worse with every post....

I wonder if we could apply linear regression to project the exact date of total meltdown.  That way we can avoid the splatter zone......

 
 
 
dennis smith
7.2.19  dennis smith  replied to  Ender @7.2.3    2 weeks ago

Was there a fabricated impeachment of Obama by the Repubs that ended up in nothing against Trump?

Was there a multiyear investigation of Obama By the Repubs that ended up with nothing against Trump? 

Answer the above honestly and you will realize both were failures of the Left.

 
 
 
Ender
7.2.20  Ender  replied to  dennis smith @7.2.19    2 weeks ago

That makes less sense than what maga said...

 
 
 
dennis smith
7.2.21  dennis smith  replied to  Ender @7.2.20    2 weeks ago

My comment had nothing to do with what Maga said, it refutes your comment 7.2.3.

 
 
 
Ender
7.2.22  Ender  replied to  dennis smith @7.2.21    2 weeks ago

It does? So saying that investigations into Obama ended with nothing against trump....

Yeah sure...that did it...

 
 
 
dennis smith
7.2.23  dennis smith  replied to  Ender @7.2.22    2 weeks ago

My bad, my initial comment was not worded as I intended. Redone below

Was there a fabricated impeachment of Obama by the Repubs that ended up in nothing like there was a fabricated impeachment of Trump by the Dems that ended up in nothing against Trump?

Was there a multiyear investigation of Obama by the Repubs that ended up with nothing like there was a multiyear investigation against Trump by the Dems that ended up in nothing against Trump? 

The right wing did nothing to Obama that even compare to the above yet comment 7.2.3 which tries to equate the two.

 
 
 
Ender
7.2.24  Ender  replied to  dennis smith @7.2.23    2 weeks ago

You can think his impeachment was fabricated, of course a lot of others will disagree, saying evidence pointed to him pressuring another country to go after a political rival.

See my comment here, 3.2.9 , Obama was investigated plenty of times.

Link won't work...

The Many Investigations Into The Administration Of Barack Obama

washingtonpost

Yes, President Trump, Congress Also Investigated Barack Obama

politifact

 
 
 
Dulay
7.2.25  Dulay  replied to  dennis smith @7.2.19    2 weeks ago
Was there a fabricated impeachment of Obama by the Repubs that ended up in nothing against Trump?

Trump was Impeached. That isn't a fabrication. 

Was there a multiyear investigation of Obama By the Repubs that ended up with nothing against Trump? 

Birtherism comes to mind, as does BENGHAZI! 

BTFW, there are 10 counts of Obstruction of Justice against Trump in the Mueller Report. 

Answer the above honestly and you will realize both were failures of the Left.

I ignored the confusion of your comment. Now do YOU realize that there was a 'successful' Impeachment and Investigation into Trump? 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
7.2.26  Trout Giggles  replied to  Dulay @7.2.25    2 weeks ago

I really do think people don't understand what impeachment means.

Ok, Class...LISTEN UP!!!! I tire of repeating myself.

Impeachment means literally "to indict". That's all the House did was indict trmp of charges. Therefore, he was impeached. The Senate held the trial and found him not guilty. He was still impeached but he kept his office and didn't even get so much as a slap on the wrist like Bill Clinton did.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
7.2.27  Trout Giggles  replied to  dennis smith @7.2.17    2 weeks ago

Hey...do you think you could do that for me, too? That would be great! Thanks in advance

 
 
 
dennis smith
7.2.28  dennis smith  replied to  Ender @7.2.24    2 weeks ago

There are always investigations of politicians.

There was no 2 year special investigation of Obama like there was of Trump. Most Dems said it would be the end of Trump and nothing of the sort was found. 

 
 
 
dennis smith
7.2.29  dennis smith  replied to  Trout Giggles @7.2.26    2 weeks ago

Which proves impeachment needs to have a solid foundation which was not the case with either Clinton or Trump. 

 
 
 
dennis smith
7.2.30  dennis smith  replied to  Trout Giggles @7.2.27    2 weeks ago

My pleasure, one more [removed commenter silenced.]

 
 
 
Dulay
7.2.31  Dulay  replied to  dennis smith @7.2.28    2 weeks ago

You're so right dennis, it wasn't a 2 year investigation, it was a 4 year investigation into Obama/Benghazi. 

 
 
 
Gsquared
7.3  Gsquared  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @7    2 weeks ago

You speak French beautifully.  Très bien. 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
7.3.1  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Gsquared @7.3    2 weeks ago
You speak French beautifully.  Très bien.

Merci beaucoup, mon amour. 

 
 
 
Ender
7.3.2  Ender  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @7.3.1    2 weeks ago

Que?

 
 
 
devangelical
7.3.3  devangelical  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @7.3.1    2 weeks ago

boi-oi-oi-oi-oing.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
7.3.4  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Ender @7.3.2    2 weeks ago
Que?

It started here: 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
7.3.5  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  devangelical @7.3.3    2 weeks ago
boi-oi-oi-oi-oing.

You say that to all the nuns.  

 
 
 
dennis smith
7.4  dennis smith  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @7    2 weeks ago

Touched a nerve huh?

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
7.4.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  dennis smith @7.4    2 weeks ago

hope u had permission this time.

 
 
 
dennis smith
7.4.2  dennis smith  replied to  igknorantzrulz @7.4.1    2 weeks ago

Permission for what?

 
 
 
Ender
8  Ender    2 weeks ago

Gotta be truthful here. It gives me a little satisfaction watching them eat their own.

They coddled donald and his theories and his followers. Now they are biting them in the ass.

 
 
 
MUVA
8.1  MUVA  replied to  Ender @8    2 weeks ago

Not really the real fight is going on between the leftist and what passes for a moderate democrats these days.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
8.1.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  MUVA @8.1    2 weeks ago

Nope, this is about a conservative calling out other conservatives for not being able to back up their outrageous claims.  Carlson (not a Democrat or leftist, at all) is asking Powell to produce some evidence.  She won't, because she can't.

 
 
 
MUVA
8.1.2  MUVA  replied to  sandy-2021492 @8.1.1    2 weeks ago

My comment is merely on the fight for the party there is no fight in the republican it's Trump's party he got more votes than any other republican and has grown the party.On the other hand BLM and the squad are telling BIden what he has to do and wall street is telling him something else. Tucker is a party supporter he is not a party member he holds no office and has no power.So you can amend your comment to be pertant.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
8.1.3  sandy-2021492  replied to  MUVA @8.1.2    2 weeks ago

Your comment was in response to one in which Ender pointed out that this is conservatives fighting with conservatives.  And they are, over Trump.  Nothing to do with leftists or Dems.  Your attempt at trying to make it about leftists is weak, when there are no leftists involved in the feud between Carlson and Powell.  They're both conservatives.  One is just a bit more honest than the other, hence the spat. 

 
 
 
Ender
8.1.4  Ender  replied to  MUVA @8.1.2    2 weeks ago
it's Trump's party

Thanks for admitting the republican party is no more.

Though I wonder how many people will jump off the bandwagon once he is out of office.

 
 
 
Texan1211
8.1.5  Texan1211  replied to  Ender @8.1.4    2 weeks ago

The declaration of the demise of the Republican Party is premature--as it always is,

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
8.1.6  sandy-2021492  replied to  Texan1211 @8.1.5    2 weeks ago

I doubt it's dead.  I think it is very fragmented.  I think many honest, decent Republicans are appalled at what is playing out in front of them right now.  This adherence to Trump after he lost is harming the party, both in the eyes of its own members, and in the eyes of independent to whom they should be trying to appeal.

 
 
 
Texan1211
8.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  sandy-2021492 @8.1.6    2 weeks ago

I KNOW it isn't dead, Democrats seem to declare it dead every so often though, for some strange reason. Same thing happened when Obama won. Some said that the GOP would not see the WH for at least a generation, and wouldn't be able to hold the majority in either House.

 
 
 
Gsquared
8.1.8  Gsquared  replied to  sandy-2021492 @8.1.6    2 weeks ago

I think many honest, decent Republicans are no longer Republicans.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
8.1.9  sandy-2021492  replied to  Gsquared @8.1.8    2 weeks ago

I think a lot are questioning their party affiliation, at the very least.

 
 
 
MAGA
8.1.10  MAGA  replied to  MUVA @8.1.2    2 weeks ago

You are exactly right yet again as you usually are.  

 
 
 
MAGA
8.1.11  MAGA  replied to  Texan1211 @8.1.5    2 weeks ago

1932, 1964, 1974, 1977, 1992, 2008, 2020 and likely more that I didn’t mention. 

 
 
 
MAGA
8.1.12  MAGA  replied to  Texan1211 @8.1.7    2 weeks ago

Democrats have their own divisions between their socialist progressive wing and their big money big tech wall st. Bankers wings.  

 
 
 
Tacos!
9  Tacos!    2 weeks ago

I think people assume that because Tucker Carlson has a show on Fox, he must be part of the Trump fan club. From what I have seen, he never has been. 

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
9.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Tacos! @9    2 weeks ago

pklease...

 
 
 
Tacos!
9.1.1  Tacos!  replied to  igknorantzrulz @9.1    2 weeks ago

Pheel phree two prewv mi rongg. Phakt phree emowshunal respawnses mien no-thing.

 
 
 
bugsy
9.1.2  bugsy  replied to  Tacos! @9.1.1    2 weeks ago

Damn, Tacos, I understood your reply better than I did his.

 
 
 
Tacos!
9.1.3  Tacos!  replied to  bugsy @9.1.2    2 weeks ago

I just lack the poetic skills, I guess.

 
 
 
Texan1211
9.2  Texan1211  replied to  Tacos! @9    2 weeks ago

I am sure these left-wingers watch Carlson every night. 

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
9.2.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Texan1211 @9.2    2 weeks ago

Keep your friends close.... keep your enemy closer......

Yes, I trip over to Fox, and Breitbart periodically.....  Good thing I have a strong stomach eh?

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
10  Thrawn 31    2 weeks ago
I Didn’t Provide Evidence to Tucker Carlson Because He Was ‘Rude’

No, you didn't present anything to him, or anyone else for that matter, because your evidence comes down to one witness by the name of Jack Shit. 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
10.1  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Thrawn 31 @10    2 weeks ago
because your evidence comes down to one witness by the name of Jack Shit. 

After 33 failed attempts to overthrow the election, I bet Jack Shit needs a vacay.

 
 
 
Useless
11  Useless    2 weeks ago

I thought lawyers had thicker skins.

 
 
 
lady in black
12  lady in black    2 weeks ago

Trump et al lost once again in PA...here is the order and memorandum of opinion:

 
 
 
Kavika
12.1  Kavika   replied to  lady in black @12    2 weeks ago

If I remember correctly this is the case that two other law firms pulled out of and Rudy Four Seasons took over and presented a few days ago. It didn't go well for Rudy then and it went a lot worse today. 

 
 
 
lady in black
12.1.1  lady in black  replied to  Kavika @12.1    2 weeks ago

Yes, it's on pages 8, 9 and 10 of the memo of opinion. 

Also on page 11 under D. Plaintiffs' Claims I love what the Judge wrote:

D. Plaintiffs’ Claims
Plaintiffs’ only remaining claim alleges a violation of equal protection. This
claim, like Frankenstein’s Monster, has been haphazardly stitched together from
two distinct theories in an attempt to avoid controlling precedent. The general
thrust of this claim is that it is unconstitutional for Pennsylvania to give states
discretion to adopt a notice-and-cure policy. Invoking Bush v. Gore, Plaintiffs
assert that such local control is unconstitutional because it creates an arbitrary
system where some persons are allowed to cure procedurally defective mail-in
ballots while others are not. 

 
 
 
Kavika
12.1.2  Kavika   replied to  lady in black @12.1.1    2 weeks ago

Bada Bing, Bada Boom.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
12.1.3  sandy-2021492  replied to  lady in black @12.1.1    2 weeks ago

From the opinion:

Defendants filed new motions to dismiss and briefs in support thereof on
November 16, 2020. That evening, less than 24 hours before oral argument was to
begin, Plaintiffs instituted a second series of substitutions in counsel. Ms. Kerns,
                                                            

along with Mr. Scott and Mr. Hughes, requested this Court’s permission to
withdraw from the litigation. I granted the motions of the Texan attorneys because
they had been involved with the case for approximately seventy-two hours.
Because oral argument was scheduled for the following day, however, and because
Ms. Kerns had been one of the original attorneys in this litigation, I denied her
request. I believed it best to have some semblance of consistency in counsel ahead
of the oral argument. 

Poor Kerns wanted to bail, and wasn't allowed to.  Trump would have lost more lawyers, had they been left to their own convictions.

 
 
 
Ender
12.1.4  Ender  replied to  Kavika @12.1.2    2 weeks ago

512

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
12.2  sandy-2021492  replied to  lady in black @12    2 weeks ago

Motion to dismiss granted, with prejudice.  Excellent.

 
 
 
Gsquared
12.2.1  Gsquared  replied to  sandy-2021492 @12.2    2 weeks ago

That is excellent.  Best news of the day.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
12.2.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  sandy-2021492 @12.2    2 weeks ago

With prejudice means it will be very difficult to bring another similar lawsuit?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
12.2.3  sandy-2021492  replied to  Trout Giggles @12.2.2    2 weeks ago

As I understand it, the case can't be reopened in court at that level.  It does not prevent an appeal, but I believe they'd have to have a good reason to appeal for a higher court to hear the case.  Gsquared is probably the best person to ask.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
12.2.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  sandy-2021492 @12.2.3    2 weeks ago

Thank-you.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
12.2.5  FLYNAVY1  replied to  sandy-2021492 @12.2.3    2 weeks ago

Hard to make a case when you have no facts or evidence to support in court what you blather in public....

If I remember right, its not what you think, its what you can prove that impresses a judge.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
12.3  Raven Wing  replied to  lady in black @12    2 weeks ago

Very interesting documents. I loved some of the words used to describe the plaintiffs reason for their filing as determined by the court;

“Among the grounds that could justify a denial of leave to amend are undue delay, bad faith, dilatory motive, prejudice, and futility.”

Yep...that states the reasons for the filing, and very nicely sums it up, and....throws light on Trumps MO. 

 
 
 
Gsquared
12.4  Gsquared  replied to  lady in black @12    2 weeks ago

Outstanding.  Great opinion by the judge.

 
 
 
lady in black
12.4.1  lady in black  replied to  Gsquared @12.4    2 weeks ago

Yes it is. 

What I find amusing after reading comments on news sites and other sites that there are people that claim the next step for this case is SCOTUS.  They can't comprehend that since this Federal case was thrown out that's it over and there is NOTHING to take to SCOTUS.  I shake my head at the absolute idiocy of some people.  

 
 
 
Gsquared
12.4.2  Gsquared  replied to  lady in black @12.4.1    2 weeks ago

A dismissal with prejudice does not mean that there cannot be an appeal.  Trump can appeal from the dismissal as far as I understand.  

 
 
 
Gsquared
12.4.3  Gsquared  replied to  lady in black @12.4.1    2 weeks ago

Judge Brann is a District Court judge.  That is the trial court level in the federal court system, so he does not have the final say unless the appellate court and Supreme Court refuse to hear the appeal.  They could, of course, hear the appeal and uphold Judge Brann's decision.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
12.4.4  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Gsquared @12.4.3    2 weeks ago

Isn't that kind of hard to do when you have no facts nor evidence to the same?

Forgive me....I do math, not law.

 
 
 
Gsquared
12.4.5  Gsquared  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @12.4.4    2 weeks ago

An appeal can be filed, but that does not mean it will be accepted for determination by the appellate court, or, if it is accepted for hearing, that the appeal will win.  Much like the underying lawsuit that Trump's lawyers filed without any supporting facts or evidence.

If you are willing to pay the filing fee, you can file your lawsuit or appeal, but that does not guarantee you will win.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
13  Hal A. Lujah    2 weeks ago

I have my own possible theory as to what is going on in conspiracy land.  If there were any possible method for vote tallies to be hacked and adulterated, there is no question that the Trump campaign would have been the one far more inclined to engage in it.  Trump has made it obvious that he would stoop to any depth to win, while all Biden had to do was sit back and watch Trump lose naturally due to his own massive incompetence and demeanor.  Is it possible that the Trump team was clandestinely led down that path and double crossed by a movement designed to ensure it would not happen?  Comments like “the only way I lose is if the election is rigged” would reinforce such a conspiratorial plan.  Now they are furious that they got cheated out of their cheat, and are doing everything they can to try an create an illusion of Democrat election meddling without exposing the actual election meddling that they thought was in their control but were robbed of.  

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
13.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @13    2 weeks ago

While I certainly wouldn't put it past Trump and his cronies to try to rig the election, I don't really know that there's any evidence that that happened, either.  It was an election that was pretty closely watched for fraud, by both sides.  It would have been pretty hard to pull off.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
13.1.1  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  sandy-2021492 @13.1    2 weeks ago

I agree that it was too closely monitored for cheating to be successful, but that doesn’t mean the Trump campaign wasn’t stupid enough to believe a planted bad actor who claimed to have an inside edge.

Trump’s legacy follows the intended arc of the Dominionism movement.  How hard would it be to convince his inner circle that voting machines marketed under the name ‘Dominion’ are built to be manipulated and will be under secret control from the right?  Trump is a dipshit conspiracy theorist to begin with, so it wouldn’t be that hard to get him on board with the right circumstances.  Make him think that it’s all going to plan and the only thing he has to do is not breathe a word of it to anyone outside of his circle.  The looks on the faces of the Trump family on election night, when they finally emerged for the cameras at his superspreader victory party, were interesting.  They looked like someone stole the baloney out of their sandwich.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
13.1.2  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @13.1.1    2 weeks ago

Do you really want to get into the mind of Trump?

You've always struck me as someone that was planted firmly in facts and truth..... Why don't you go roll one if you want to depart from reality a bit.  Should be quite a bit safer.  Fights glaucoma as well if I remember right.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
13.1.3  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @13.1.2    2 weeks ago

That’s the thing about conspiracies - they actually happen all the time, much more often than they are exposed (think insider trading, why so and so got the promotion, food safety recalls, etc.)  A sleazebag like Donald Trump has probably taken part in thousands of conspiracies throughout his life to get what he wants. Exposing them must start with a theory, so during that phase even the most factual conspiracy must share the title of ‘conspiracy theory’ with garbage conspiracy theories like QAnon.   Seeing the unshakeable look of confidence on his face over this campaign followed up with the look on his face and his reactions on election night kind of piqued my curiosity on if he maybe thought that the fix was in when it really was not.

Why don't you go roll one if you want to depart from reality a bit.

It’s only 3:58 pm here.  Give me about 22 minutes. jrSmiley_9_smiley_image.gif

ps - Dominionism is hardly a conspiracy theory at this point.  It’s been as plain as the nose on your face for the last four years.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
13.1.4  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @13.1.3    2 weeks ago

I believe your thinking can in some ways align with what I've come to believe over the years....... "There is profit in chaos!"

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Vic Eldred
devangelical
pat wilson
Raven Wing
lady in black


47 visitors