Former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell, a Trump campaign lawyer, suggested in a Sunday interview that there is still more evidence coming out in President Donald Trump’s claims of voter fraud and irregularities.
“We’re getting ready to overturn election results in multiple states,” Powell said, saying that she has enough evidence of election fraud to launch a widespread criminal investigation.
“I don’t make comments without having the evidence to back it up,” she added, saying that elections software switched “millions of votes” from Trump to Democratic nominee Joe Biden.
Powell notably provided legal counsel to Gen. Michael Flynn in 2019. She was named to Trump’s legal team in the past several days.
Powell said a whistleblower came forward and said the elections software was designed to “rig elections,” saying that “he saw it happen in other countries,” referring to voting systems Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic, or perhaps other software and machines.
“We have so much evidence, I feel like it’s coming in through a fire hose,” Powell said, while noting that she won’t reveal the evidence that she has.
“They can stick a thumb drive in the [voting] machine, they can upload software to it even from the Internet … from Germany or Venezuela even,” she said, adding that operations “can watch votes in real-time” and “can shift votes in real-time,” or alleged bad actors can “remote access anything.”
“We’ve identified mathematically the exact algorithm they’ve used—and planned to use from the beginning” that allegedly switched votes to Biden, Powell remarked.
Powell also made reference to a 2019 investigation from Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), as well as other Democratic lawmakers into Dominion Voting Systems, Election Systems & Software, and Hart InterCivic. The senators had expressed concerns about the security of the voting systems.
“(W)e have concerns about the spread and effect of private equity investment in many sectors of the economy, including the election technology industry—an integral part of our nation’s democratic process,” wrote the lawmakers in their letters to the firms about a year ago.
“These problems threaten the integrity of our elections and demonstrate the importance of election systems that are strong, durable, and not vulnerable to attack.”
Later in the Sunday morning interview, Powell said that her team has “detected voting irregularities that are inexplicable” in states where officials believe they have valid systems.
During the election, Republicans in the House were able to flip at least 11 seats while the GOP is poised to maintain control of the Senate. Some conservatives have questioned how such a voting pattern is possible for Biden to win the presidential election, let alone receive more votes than any other presidential candidate in American history, including President Barack Obama’s victory in 2008.
Originally Posted by Just Passin' By:
You came here and jumped into a discussion about 27 tossup races, without knowing it was about the 27 tossup races in Cook's report, and started trying to minimize it while referencing the wrong site (Ballotpedia). That just happened, so I included you as an example of someone who almost never posts here coming over and posting out of ignorance. I meant no malice about it, but I should probably have laid out your specific example to make my point clear. My apologies for posting that so clumsily that you thought you needed to defend yourself.
I asked about that because I've seen that tossup number referenced here and elsewhere. It seems like a cherry-picked number of races, as I had seen many more toss-ups referenced by Ballotpedia and other sources.
I wasn't posting out of ignorance. I was trying to get details on that claim so I can evaluate it.
Let's go through the toss-ups Cook Political Report Cites as Democratic toss-ups:
CA-21 - This is a seat the Dem incumbent Cox flipped in 2018, from the Republican challenger Valadao. This race is still up in the air, actually, with Cox having a path to victory that looks like it could end up being exactly like his victory in 2018 (an extremely narrow victory for Cox once all votes are counted). Trump carried it in 2016 and again this year.
IA-01 - The Dem incumbent Finkenauer flipped this seat in 2018, frm a R. It's a district Trump won in 2016 and carried again this year.
IA-02 - This one is separated by 6 votes in favor of the R and not officially over. The seat was open after the long-time D incumbent retired prior to the election. Trump won it in 2016 and carried it again this year.
MN-7 - This is a R defeat of a longtime incumbent. Trump won the district by large margins in 2016 and 2020, which is why it was rated as a toss-up by Cook and a lean R by others.
NM -02 - Another seat flipped D in 2018, with the losing R running again in 2020 and taking it. Voted for Trump in 2016 and again in 2020 (And Romeny in 2012).
NY -11 - The D incumbent that lost here flipped this seat in 2018, a seat that had been R since 2011. It was Trump in 2016 and again in 2020.
NY -22 - This one isn't actually over, apparently. Currently separated by about 20 votes. The D incumbent flipped this seat in 2018, and the R defeated in 18 ran again this year. Judicial review looks like it will determine this one. Went Trump in 2016 and 2020.
OK-05 - Flipped in 18 by the D incumbent, this long-time R seat went red again in 2020 as Trump carried votes in the area again (just like in 16).
UT-04 - Flipped in 18 by the D incumbent, long-time R seat went red again in 2020. Trump won in 16 and 20.
Notice a pattern there?
All those seats were won by Trump big in 2020 and 2016. All but one featured a first-term D who won the 2018 election. The 18 seats that Cook rated as toss-ups with a R incumbent (or previously held by a R, as MI-03 was Amash's district) stayed red and voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020.
So you can look at those 27 races and say the fact they all went R is a sign that Trump is getting robbed, I guess. I look at them and am not surprised.
27-0 record in toss-ups is an impressive-sounding stat. When you look at it, what happened in those races isn't surprising considering the history of those seats and their presidential election results. [Reply]
Originally Posted by NinerDoug:
One of Trumps other lawyers said Krebs should be taken out and shot.
I read somewhere that Trump’s got all these loons working for him because the actual, non-loon attorneys who do this kind of work won’t touch this one.
Real champions of the democratic process, arent they? [Reply]
Originally Posted by NinerDoug:
One of Trumps other lawyers said Krebs should be taken out and shot.
I read somewhere that Trump’s got all these loons working for him because the actual, non-loon attorneys who do this kind of work won’t touch this one.
You and BEP read something somewhere and posted it on the internet [Reply]
Originally Posted by F150:
You and BEP read something somewhere and posted it on the internet
On Monday President Trump’s campaign lawyer and former U.S. Attorney Joe diGenova said that fired Trump cybersecurity chief Chris Krebs should be executed for saying that the election was the “most secure in United States history.”
“Anybody who thinks that this election went well, like that idiot Krebs who used to be the head of cybersecurity [for Trump]. That guy is a class A moron. He should be drawn and quartered. Taken out at dawn and shot,” diGenova said.
Originally Posted by BigBeauford:
On Monday President Trump’s campaign lawyer and former U.S. Attorney Joe diGenova said that fired Trump cybersecurity chief Chris Krebs should be executed for saying that the election was the “most secure in United States history.”
“Anybody who thinks that this election went well, like that idiot Krebs who used to be the head of cybersecurity [for Trump]. That guy is a class A moron. He should be drawn and quartered. Taken out at dawn and shot,” diGenova said.
Originally Posted by stevieray:
List the people penalized for perjury, liar.
Remember what I said before about you being stupid?
It's a little too early for perjury penalties, but an affidavit can be complete bullshit without it being perjury. [Reply]
Originally Posted by cosmo20002:
Remember what I said before about you being stupid?
It's a little too early for perjury penalties, but an affidavit can be complete bullshit without it being perjury.
Originally Posted by cosmo20002:
Remember what I said before about you being stupid?
It's a little too early for perjury penalties, but an affidavit can be complete bullshit without it being perjury.
But...lying on a sworn afadavit would bring some kind of penalty, no? Serious question... [Reply]
Originally Posted by stevieray:
go hump BL's leg, jezebel.
you're so ****ing boring at this point
I'm busy at the moment giving some basic information to one of CP's dumbest posters.
And good idea changing your avi. The Joe Perry using a sort-of EVH guitar was kind of confusing sort of made it seem like it was just a shitty EVH drawing. [Reply]