(11-20-2020 09:51 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(11-20-2020 08:35 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-20-2020 08:26 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-20-2020 08:04 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Interesting article. Apparently Tucker Carlson wanted to give the Trump legal team a platform to make their case for voter fraud with respect to voting machines, but they got angry with him about the offer. Apparently Tucker Carlson has now joined the vast liberal conspiracy against the President.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/tuck...43725.html

Quote:Tucker Carlson claims Trump's attorney 'got angry' when they pressed her for evidence of voter fraud
On Tucker Carlson Tonight Thursday, rather than push the idea of a fraudulent presidential election, Carlson called out one of President Trump’s attorneys, Sidney Powell, for failing to provide evidence of fraud. Powell has repeatedly claimed that voting machines were rigged in favor of Joe Biden, and that Trump actually won the election by millions of votes. In a bizarre press conference earlier in the day, Powell even claimed that deceased Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who died in 2013, had something to do with the rigging of the machines. Carlson said that he has tried on numerous occasions to get Powell to appear on the show and provide evidence backing up her claims, but to no avail.

“We took Sidney Powell seriously. We had no intention of fighting with her, we’ve always respected her work,” Carlson said. “We simply wanted to see the details. How could you not want to see them? So we invited Sidney Powell on the show. We would have given her the whole hour. We would have given her the entire week, actually, and listened quietly the whole time at rapt attention. That’s a big story. But she never sent us any evidence despite a lot of requests, polite requests. Not a page. When we kept pressing, she got angry and told us to stop contacting her.”

Disappointed in Tucker when I heard that. Powell has said as plain as day a hundred times they are not going to reveal their evidence until they are in a court of law. Seems to me if this is the case they are not going on Tuckers show and lay their cards on the table. Maybe they are angry because Tucker won’t take no for an answer.

NO media personnel deserve specifics before trial....

#endDiscussion

fk 'em all...

While I don't disagree that a party has no obligation to share their evidence with the media, it is completely untrue that they do not have to reveal it. First, parties must share all of the evidence they might use in a court case with the opposing party in advance. They don't have to reveal their strategy or what conclusions they believe can be inferred from that evidence, but they do have to reveal it. Therefore, revealing the evidence to the press provides no unfair advantage to the other side.

Second, they are asking for injunctive relief. They will need to provide this evidence to the court at the very beginning of the case, otherwise they lose by default. A request for injunctive relief should not be confused with an ordinary civil case, which allows attorneys to allege facts that they can't yet prove, but which usually takes years to get to a decision. It won't do Trump any good to find out he won the 2020 election if he has to wait until 2024 to find out. Bottom line, they can hold off revealing the testimony to Tucker Carlson today, but they will need to reveal all of it to the court and to opposing counsel in the next few days.

The only reason not to reveal the evidence now is that they either don't have any or the evidence they have is extremely weak. When you are seeking injunctive relief, you really need to put your best evidence into the record right out of the gate. The only reasonable conclusion is that they won't share this new evidence with Tucker Carlson or some friendly news outlet is that it is even weaker than that already presented and that has resulted in numerous dismissals.

the only argument in this discussion is sharing critical evidence beforehand with the msm...the rest of your posit is irrelevant...