Bob Unruh writes about Sidney Powell interviews where she shared the USA is a “Communist regime” in which America’s citizens are lied ti every day. READ & WATCH!
JRH 5/6/21
I need your generosity in 2021 via - credit cards, check
cards
& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account:
Or if donating you can support by getting in the Coffee from home
business making yourself extra cash – OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee, that
includes immune boosting products. Big Tech Censorship is pervasive – Share
voluminously on all social media platforms!
******************************
Sidney Powell: America is now a 'Communist regime'
'They're feeding lies to the American people [e]very
single day'
By Bob
Unruh
Published May 5, 2021 at 7:42pm
Sidney
Powell (FNC Video screenshot)
One of the lawyers who fought, without a lot of success, to
have evidence of fraud in the 2020 presidential election reviewed by the courts
in America has delivered a harsh verdict on the state of the nation under
President Joe Biden.
Sidney Powell, a former federal prosecutor, worked on cases
that, had they succeeded, would have been to the benefit of President Trump.
They argued various state election systems mishandled mailed
ballots, absentee ballots and even suggested fraudulent ballots, with huge
dumps of votes all for Biden sometimes appearing in the dark-of-the-night
hours.
She was interviewed on The Talk of Pittsburgh radio, the Rose
Unplugged show.
Youtube VIDEO: SIDNEY
POWELL
[Posted by Rose Unplugged
392 subscribers - May 4, 2021
Sidney Powell on Rose Unplugged:
"WE ARE LIVING UNDER A COMMUNIST TOTALITARIAN REGIME" "IF THEY
HAD NOTHING TO HIDE - THEY WOULDN'T BE HIDING ANYTHING"]
"The world is absolutely upside down because this
country is upside down," she charged. "They're feeding lies to the
American people [e]very single day. Just the fact that they're saying Biden is
president is a lie because we've still got to resolve the election issue."
While the allegations of deception and mishandling of
ballots never got reviewed – most judges dismissed the cases on technicalities
– what is not in question is that in multiple states where Biden narrowly was
the winner state officials changed state laws to accommodate some ballots.
The difficulty with that is that the Constitution requires
state lawmakers to control those variables.
The Gateway Pundit explained Powell said,
"We are living under a Communist totalitarian regime. If the voting
machine companies had nothing to hide, they wouldn’t be hiding anything."
She charged there were millions of fraudulent votes for
Biden in 2020.
Even after her lawsuits over the election were closed down,
Powell remained unshaken.
Earlier, she told Erskine Radio in an interview that there
is "more than enough evidence in the public now to more than reverse the election
in at least five states."
"There’s all kind of precedent for fixing what happened
in this election from Bush vs. Gore to other cases as well," she
said, the Gateway Pundit reported.
Powell said the existence of "fractionalized
votes" weighted in favor of Joe Biden, created by a computer algorithm,
can be proved in multiple counties. And it could be proved across the country,
she said, "if anybody would issue an order allowing inspection of the
machines."
She noted that federal law calls for election records to be
kept for 22 months.
"In this case it requires forensic evaluations of the
machines and looking at all of the paper ballots. We already know that’s not
going to match up," she said. "There were counterfeit ballots. People
were saying, 'Oh, well they did a full audit in Georgia.' Well, if you just
keep running the same counterfeit bill through the same counting machine you’re
going to get the same result."
Here the interview:
Rumble VIDEO: General
Michael Flynn & Sidney Powell Interview Exposes SCOTUS Refusing to Hear
Election Fraud Cases
[Posted by Patriot Prosperity
Published March 3,
2021
Patriots Lt. General Michael Flynn
& Sidney Powell Latest Interview Erskine Radio (podcast) exposing why the
U.S Supreme Court Refused to Hear the Election Fraud Cases, and much more...
MORE
TO READ]
She said there's no reasonable explanation for the courts
not having reviewed the evidence.
Going on right now in Arizona is a fully audit of all 2.1
million ballots from Maricopa County. Results are expected in a couple of weeks
but Democrats repeatedly have gone to court to try to have the results
suppressed.
She noted that more than 5,000 people have signed sworn
affidavits as witnesses of election anomalies or fraud.
Powell served in the Department of Justice for 10 years and
for the last 20 years has devoted her private practice to federal appeals. She
was the youngest assistant U.S attorney and later became chief of the appellate
section for the Western and Northern Districts of Texas.
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch took
a minority position at the Supreme Court when it rejected several election
disputes, arguing that the court should have taken up election challenges from
Pennsylvania.
Thomas warned of "catastrophic" consequences if
the court doesn't address the issue of authorities "changing the rules in
the middle of the game."
University of California at Irvine Professor Rick Hasen on his
Election Law Blog wrote it's "a ticking time bomb"
that the Supreme Court "is going to have to resolve."
Hasen wrote: "So why didn’t the court go further in
this case? My guess is that it is either the fact that the case is moot (and
the court would rather address the issue in the context of a live case, but
with lower stakes) or because the Trump cases are somewhat radioactive at the
court. Given former President Trump’s continued false statements that the
election was stolen [Blog Editor: THERE IS NOTHING FALSE IN TRUMP STATEMENT!
THE ELECTION WAS CRIMINALLY STOLEN!], the case would become a further
vehicle to argue that the election results were illegitimate. It would thrust
the court back in the spotlight on an issue the justices showed repeatedly they
wanted to avoid.
"So the bottom line is that the independent state
legislature doctrine hangs out there, as a ticking time bomb, waiting to go off
in a future case," he said.
Thomas said the Pennsylvania cases "provide us with an
ideal opportunity to address just what authority non-legislative officials have
to set election rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle."
"The refusal to do so is inexplicable."
He said there's little dispute about the facts:
The Constitution gives to each
state legislature authority to determine the 'Manner' of federal elections. …
Yet both before and after the 2020 election, nonlegislative officials in
various states took it upon themselves to set the rules instead. As a result,
we received an unusually high number of petitions and emergency applications
contesting those changes. The petitions here present a clear example. The
Pennsylvania Legislature established an unambiguous deadline for receiving
mail-in ballots: 8 p.m. on election day. Dissatisfied, the Pennsylvania Supreme
Court extended that deadline by three days. The court also ordered officials to
count ballots received by the new deadline even if there was no evidence—such
as a postmark—that the ballots were mailed by election day. That decision to
rewrite the rules seems to have affected too few ballots to change the outcome
of any federal election. But that may not be the case in the future.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for
re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a
large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please
contact licensing@wndnewscenter.org.
© 2021 WND
No comments:
Post a Comment