Sunday, March 28, 2021

What Did Sidney Powell ACTUALLY Say?

You'll be learn that CNN (et al) were not quite telling the truth about Powell's defense tactics vis-a-vis Dominion.

...CNN recently claimed that “Sidney Powell argues in new court filing that no reasonable people would believe her election fraud claims.” Similarly, CBS News asserted that “Sidney Powell tells court ‘no reasonable person’ would take her voter fraud claims as fact.” The implication is that Powell, one of the most prominent critics of the 2020 presidential election, who has been outspoken in her claims that Joe Biden’s victory was secured through outright fraud involving, in particular, illegal and malicious manipulation of the vote-counting machines, has now repudiated those claims....

Yah, nope!

But since understanding Powell's response requires more than a 6-year-old's mental agility, it confuses CNN and CBS.

Want reality? is accurate that the filing by Powell’s attorneys in the defamation lawsuit did assert that when Powell made her charges of election fraud involving the Dominion voting systems, she made clear that she was asserting opinion rather than fact, as her charges remained to be proved, and the evidence on which she relied for her assertions (which was spelled out in detail by Powell at the time) still had not been authenticated in a judicial setting. 

The explanation for this seeming anomaly (that Powell believed and still believes that fraud took place and her lawyers’ assertion that she was only asserting opinion) is that for Dominion to succeed in its libel case against Powell it would have to prove that she knew what she was asserting was false, and that, indeed that falsity was a matter of fact she consciously or recklessly malevolently presented as something it was not. ...

Get it?

...Her lawyers, in other words, were simply making a highly technical legal argument that at the time Powell made the statements in question they could only be matters of opinion, and the statement of an opinion is not a statement of fact and therefore could not be grounds for a defamation action. This is not the easiest point to grasp, but any reading of the whole pleading by anyone with legal training should have made it evident....

It's not that "highly" technical.  It's common sense, given the law.

You still actually watch CNN?  CBS?  Why??

No comments: