Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Trump Campaign: Sidney Powell “is not a member of the Trump Legal Team”

    Trump Campaign: Sidney Powell “is not a member of the Trump Legal Team”

    “She is practicing law on her own.”
    Listen to this article

    Lawyer Sidney Powell advanced what I characterized as a “a unified theory of election software and hardware fraud that spans numerous countries, possibly “three-letter agencies,” and an election night execution of a preexisting plan across several jurisdictions.”

    The claim centered on alleged manipulation of Dominion voting machines to flip millions of votes from Trump to Biden. The obvious problem with such an assertion is that it required proof of involvement by many independent actors in many different locations acting in concert. Powell’s assertion was a grand conspiracy, in contrast to Rudy Guiliani’s claim to have affidavits and witnesses to specific acts of voter fraud (the problem with Rudy’s claims is that the remedy of disqualifying hundreds of thousands of votes because some of them might be fraudulent was not a remedy any court was likely to grant).

    (added) Byron York points out how broad Powell’s accusations have become, asserting that some Republicans were in on the scheme.

    I noted that the burden was on Powell to come forward with the proof:

    But something being possible is not the same thing as proof that it did happen. Powell says she has proof it happened, but she offered no details today. It would shake our system to the core if such evidence exists and is provable, but I don’t think people should get their hopes up. Prove me wrong, please, I’m practically begging her to do so, but in the end, she is going to need proof, not conjecture.

    It’s curious that earlier tonight the Trump campaign issued a statement distancing itself from Powell. Jenna Ellis, the campaign’s attorney, tweeted the statement:

    “Sidney Powell is practicing law on her own. She is not a member of the Trump legal team. She is also not a lawyer for the President in his personal capacity.”

    Since Powell appeared at a press conference with Ellis and Rudy just days ago, it’s hard to see how she was not viewed as part of the legal team. So the campaign statement likely reflects that whatever it was the campaign thought Powell had, she doesn’t.

    You can only imagine the joy at this development among the same people who for four years told us Trump paid hookers to pee on a bed in Moscow because Obama slept in it, who was a Russian agent being run personally by Putin, and who was worse than Hitler. In addition to those miscreants, there are many Republicans running for the hills.

    Lin Wood is standing by Powell:

    I don’t know whether Powell has the proof. It’s possible, as some people speculate, that she’s holding everything close to the vest for court. But if that’s not the case, and she doesn’t have the proof, then she has done great damage to the legitimate concerns about voter fraud and weakening of voter security.

    We will update if there are further developments tonight.


    Powell issues a statement via Michael Flynn:

    Powell has issued a statement standing by her claims and promising to file suit soon.


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    kittymyers | November 23, 2020 at 10:08 am

    Sundance at CTH explained: This is all about who is getting paid by the campaign and RNC. The Trump campaign isn’t going to reimburse Sidney Powell for any expenses, nor is she allowed to make offers of financial payment from the GOP or Trump campaign. The vultures assembling and protecting their paychecks do not want Powell getting paid, nor do they want any financial liability. … That announcement is all about money; nothing more.

    A reminder:

    How presidential electors are selected by states. The U.S. Constitution vests that authority exclusively in state legislatures. The offices of President and Vice President were created by the U.S. Constitution, and when a state legislature exercises this power to determine the manner in which electors are chosen, that power is governed solely by the federal Constitution. See Leser v. Garnett, 258 U.S. 130, 137 (1922) (function of state legislature in carrying out a federal function derived from the U.S. Constitution “transcends any limitations sought to be imposed by the people of a State”). No state constitution, state law, or state court can alter or constrain that grant of power. In one century-old case, the U.S. Supreme Court applied the electors clause, recognizing the exclusive authority of the state legislatures to act for the people with respect to selection of electors.

    The appointment of these electors is thus placed absolutely and wholly with the legislatures of the several states. They may be chosen by the legislature, or the legislature may provide that they shall be elected by the people of the state at large, or in districts, as are members of congress, which was the case formerly in many states; and it is [no] doubt competent for the legislature to authorize the governor, or the supreme court of the state, or any other agent of its will, to appoint these electors. This power is conferred upon the legislatures of the states by the constitution of the United States, and cannot be taken from them or modified by their state constitutions … Whatever provisions may be made by statute, or by the state constitution, to choose electors by the people, there is no doubt of the right of the legislature to resume the power at any time, for it can neither be taken away nor abdicated. [McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1, 34–35 (1892) (emphasis added).]

      Milhouse in reply to Viator. | November 23, 2020 at 3:07 pm

      This is true. But all the state legislatures have already specified how their states electors are to be chosen, so by default they have no actual role in the choosing. It’s not as if they are going to be faced with the task of certifying their states’ electors; that is done by some other official whom the legislature has authorized (who it is varies by state).

      It is true that the legislature can now change its mind and lay down a different method of choosing the electors, but that would run afoul of the federal statute and thus lose them its guarantee that their state’s electors’ votes will be counted on Jan 3.

      If a state changes the rules now, and sends in a slate of electors that isn’t the outcome of the Nov 3 election, it would be up to Mike Pence whether to count those electors, and if he did count them there’d be a constitutional crisis like the one in 1876, because the constitution doesn’t say who decides which electors’ votes to count. All it says is that he must count them in the presence of congress, but whether they’re supposed to just be silent witnesses or to decide questions about the electors’ eligibility is unspecified, and was left unresolved in the compromise that solved that crisis.

      In addition, no state legislature is going to do such a thing unless it has convincing proof that Trump really won that state. Without that, a state legislature that did so would be devastated at the next state election. The state’s people wouldn’t stand for it. And that proof is hard to find.

    smalltownoklahoman | November 23, 2020 at 11:03 am

    A good video to watch on this subject:

    The steal would have required several things.
    1. An up to date running count total.
    2. An algorithm to forecast the net changes in vote count required for a Biden victory
    3 A process to eliminate Trump votes electronically and ballots physically
    4 A process to produce illegal votes for Biden electronically
    and physically ballots.
    Prerequisites. (Massive mail in ballots, lenient verification ,late receipt of ballots, extended counting times
    I’m pretty sure we have evidence of all these things available to the general public.
    How is it presentable and provable is beyond me. I hope its the Kraken!

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend