November 23, 2020
Making sense of the news about Sidney Powell
By Andrea Widburg
You probably already know that Trump's legal team announced that Sidney Powell is not a team member. The brief statement leaves unanswered the most important question: "Why?" Absent solid information, speculation leads us either to "This is the beginning of the end" or "This is all part of the plan" — and I'm leaning to the latter.
Events happened with head-spinning speed. On Thursday, Trump's legal team held a press conference. Rudy Giuliani talked about traditional voter fraud (cemetery voters, faked ballots, etc.); Sidney Powell talked about corrupt, or corruptible, election software, a familiar topic to the State of Texas, NPR, and MSNBC; and Jenna Ellison reminded the press that the conference was not an evidentiary hearing but was, instead, an opening statement.
For over a week, Powell has been making the media rounds, asserting that the system used in several states — Dominion Software, running on Smartmatic machines — originated in Venezuela when Hugo Chávez wanted a system that could cleanly swing elections his way. She spoke about votes being counted abroad, software changes, and vote manipulation over the internet.
While her numbers were breathtaking (Trump "had at least 80 million votes"), Powell's stated facts tracked available information: Smartmatic came out of Venezuela; in 2007, Smartmatic announced that it was selling its Sequoia Voting Systems to Dominion; the chairman of Smartmatic's board is a George Soros crony; the system is easily hackable; Georgia's system was vulnerable; and the data coming out of the swing states shows anomalies that cannot occur naturally. (You can see all the known evidence here.) These facts made Powell's contentions sound credible.
On Thursday and Friday, there was a public spat between Tucker Carlson and Powell. Carlson claimed that Powell had no evidence and got nasty when he pushed; Powell asserted that she offered evidence, but Tucker got nasty because it wasn't when he wanted.
This spat put Trump-supporters in the uncomfortable position of choosing between, on the one hand, a lawyer who took on the federal government and proved that its attack on Gen. Michael Flynn was a set-up intended to take down both Flynn and then newly elected President Trump and, on the other hand, a television personality who's been braver than most in calling out leftism and standing up against his own company's quisling tendencies. (See also what a warrior for truth Sidney Powell has always been.)
And then this:
The Washington Examiner added the claim that "sources close to the president" say Powell lacks evidence, which explains the distancing. Ask yourself if any "sources close to" Trump has ever been correct. They're invariably NeverTrumps. It's possible that this time the source could be correct, but I caution patience.
Powell's response was swift (although it's been deleted from Twitter):
Michael Flynn, Jr., the general's son, parlayed some initial information:
He later added background:
That makes sense. If Powell represents the campaign, the government regulates individual donations. If she's apart from the campaign, things are less constrained.
Lin Wood also chimed in, assuring people Powell is still in the game:
There are two ways to view all this:
The "it's all over" viewpoint. Powell overpromised, and she's become a source of danger and mortification who must be jettisoned.
The "there is a deep game afoot" viewpoint. Here are the moving parts behind this approach:
1. The facts about Dominion and Smartmatic, above.
2. The strong statistical indication about voter fraud, also above.
3. Powell's statement to Larry O'Connor on Friday that she represents the people, not the president:
Error 404 (Not Found)!!14. The information that Michael Flynn, Jr. and Lin Wood provided about the administration separating from Powell for financial reasons and her still being in the fight.
Currently, I believe that this election was marked by epic fraud. You cannot convince me that Biden, who got five or six people to his rallies, as opposed to the 52,000 or so at Trump's rallies in Pennsylvania, ended with more votes than Obama.
Nobody ever said proving this fraud would be easy (or, sadly, even possible). I'm treating its unfolding like an epic novel with a surprise ending. I just wish I knew whether it was going to be a happy or a tragic ending.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/11/making_sense_of_the_news_about_sidney_powell.html
