+ Reply to Thread
Page 100 of 124 FirstFirst 1 50 90 100 110 124 LastLast
Results 1,981 to 2,000 of 2471

Thread: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

  1. Link to Post #1981
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    BREAKING: Sidney Powell Addresses The Nation: BIG CHANGES ON THE WAY! Do Not Give Up!

    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021), pyrangello (13th January 2021), Savannah (13th January 2021), selinam (13th January 2021)

  3. Link to Post #1982
    Avalon Member Eric J (Viking)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    16th March 2010
    Location
    Stockbridge Hampshire UK
    Posts
    4,623
    Thanks
    13,099
    Thanked 24,157 times in 3,105 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    General Flynn's Message To America (video 2 mins)

    https://www.bitchute.com/video/jELA18vC2OGZ/

    Viking
    You decide...your thoughts..your actions..your reality.
    Choose well.
    https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...are-the-change

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Eric J (Viking) For This Post:

    iota (13th January 2021), pyrangello (13th January 2021), selinam (13th January 2021)

  5. Link to Post #1983
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    Robert David Steele with Nicholas Veniamin

    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    Arcturian108 (13th January 2021), Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021), ramus (13th January 2021), Rawhide68 (13th January 2021)

  7. Link to Post #1984
    Avalon Member Gemma13's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th May 2011
    Location
    Western Australia
    Language
    Australian
    Age
    59
    Posts
    2,568
    Thanks
    8,947
    Thanked 17,554 times in 2,528 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    SATORI: Is it at all conceivable that Sidney Powell being sued will bring to light the evidence she claims to have that couldn't get heard in court before 5 Jan?

    This article claims Dominion is suing Powell for 1.3 billion:

    https://reason.com/2021/01/11/sidney...ally-cost-her/

  8. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Gemma13 For This Post:

    Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021), Eva2 (13th January 2021), fifi (13th January 2021), pueblo (13th January 2021), Satori (13th January 2021), Savannah (13th January 2021), selinam (13th January 2021), T Smith (13th January 2021), TargeT (13th January 2021)

  9. Link to Post #1985
    Canada Avalon Member Olam's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th March 2010
    Location
    Montreal
    Age
    57
    Posts
    618
    Thanks
    2,003
    Thanked 3,590 times in 532 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    Last edited by Olam; 13th January 2021 at 15:15.

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Olam For This Post:

    iota (13th January 2021), TargeT (13th January 2021)

  11. Link to Post #1986
    United States On Sabbatical
    Join Date
    30th June 2011
    Location
    The Seat of Corruption
    Age
    44
    Posts
    9,177
    Thanks
    25,610
    Thanked 53,659 times in 8,694 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    Quote Posted by Gemma13 (here)
    SATORI: Is it at all conceivable that Sidney Powell being sued will bring to light the evidence she claims to have that couldn't get heard in court before 5 Jan?

    This article claims Dominion is suing Powell for 1.3 billion:

    https://reason.com/2021/01/11/sidney...ally-cost-her/
    yes, via discovery...assuming this goes to court and doesn't get bounced via a technicality like everything else seems to be.
    Hard times create strong men, Strong men create good times, Good times create weak men, Weak men create hard times.
    Where are you?

  12. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to TargeT For This Post:

    avid (13th January 2021), BushPilot (13th January 2021), Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021), Gemma13 (14th January 2021), Iancorgi (13th January 2021), iota (13th January 2021), onevoice (13th January 2021), Savannah (13th January 2021), selinam (13th January 2021), T Smith (13th January 2021)

  13. Link to Post #1987
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    26th May 2010
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM, USA
    Age
    73
    Posts
    2,450
    Thanks
    11,327
    Thanked 22,061 times in 2,419 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    Quote Posted by TargeT (here)
    Quote Posted by Gemma13 (here)
    SATORI: Is it at all conceivable that Sidney Powell being sued will bring to light the evidence she claims to have that couldn't get heard in court before 5 Jan?

    This article claims Dominion is suing Powell for 1.3 billion:

    https://reason.com/2021/01/11/sidney...ally-cost-her/
    yes, via discovery...assuming this goes to court and doesn't get bounced via a technicality like everything else seems to be.

    I agree generally with Target. But I will add that this case is not likely to get bounced, at least not right out of the gate like the cases brought for Trump, because it is brought by Dominion against Powell, not by Powell or her client against Dominion.

    Also, the claims are different and more traditional and well-established. That is, they do not directly challenge the election steal, excuse me, results. I understand the claims against her are essentially defamation and injury to business. (I have not read the complaint.)

    As far as discovery, the rules exist for Powell to discover the evidence necessary to defend the claims against her, which defense is at its core truth. But, the judge has the power to put limits on that. I expect dominion will resist any discovery that opens up the black box and provides transparency for Powell to defend herself and prove her statements are true. The will claim such things as trade secret, confidentiality, immunity, and that state secrets and national security security are implicated.

    It will be up to the judge to sort out discovery disputes. Hopefully, but remains to be seen, a fair and honest judge has been or will be assigned to the case.

    Powell may have counterclaims she will bring against Dominion too. See may also seek to join or add other parties to the lawsuit. This will also provide grounds for discovery; if her claims, if any, are not dismissed.

    If I were her I’d try to get the case dismissed, but that will be hard, and failing that, keep it as simple as possible and not add parties. There will be an army of lawyers working against her as it is and she would do well to not cause more of them to step on the field of play.

  14. The Following 23 Users Say Thank You to Satori For This Post:

    Alan (13th January 2021), Arcturian108 (13th January 2021), avid (13th January 2021), Ben (13th January 2021), Bill Ryan (13th January 2021), BushPilot (13th January 2021), ClearWater (13th January 2021), Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021), fifi (13th January 2021), Gemma13 (14th January 2021), greybeard (13th January 2021), iota (13th January 2021), Journeyman (13th January 2021), Merkaba360 (14th January 2021), onevoice (13th January 2021), pueblo (13th January 2021), ramus (13th January 2021), Reinhard (13th January 2021), Savannah (13th January 2021), selinam (13th January 2021), skogvokter (14th January 2021), T Smith (13th January 2021), TargeT (13th January 2021)

  15. Link to Post #1988
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    26th May 2010
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM, USA
    Age
    73
    Posts
    2,450
    Thanks
    11,327
    Thanked 22,061 times in 2,419 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    Quote Posted by Satori (here)
    Quote Posted by TargeT (here)
    Quote Posted by Gemma13 (here)
    SATORI: Is it at all conceivable that Sidney Powell being sued will bring to light the evidence she claims to have that couldn't get heard in court before 5 Jan?

    This article claims Dominion is suing Powell for 1.3 billion:

    https://reason.com/2021/01/11/sidney...ally-cost-her/
    yes, via discovery...assuming this goes to court and doesn't get bounced via a technicality like everything else seems to be.

    I agree generally with Target. But I will add that this case is not likely to get bounced, at least not right out of the gate like the cases brought for Trump, because it is brought by Dominion against Powell, not by Powell or her client against Dominion.

    Also, the claims are different and more traditional and well-established. That is, they do not directly challenge the election steal, excuse me, results. I understand the claims against her are essentially defamation and injury to business. (I have not read the complaint.)

    As far as discovery, the rules exist for Powell to discover the evidence necessary to defend the claims against her, which defense is at its core truth. But, the judge has the power to put limits on that. I expect dominion will resist any discovery that opens up the black box and provides transparency for Powell to defend herself and prove her statements are true. The will claim such things as trade secret, confidentiality, immunity, and that state secrets and national security security are implicated.

    It will be up to the judge to sort out discovery disputes. Hopefully, but remains to be seen, a fair and honest judge has been or will be assigned to the case.

    Powell may have counterclaims she will bring against Dominion too. See may also seek to join or add other parties to the lawsuit. This will also provide grounds for discovery; if her claims, if any, are not dismissed.

    If I were her I’d try to get the case dismissed, but that will be hard, and failing that, keep it as simple as possible and not add parties. There will be an army of lawyers working against her as it is and she would do well to not cause more of them to step on the field of play.
    I write to add that , apart from any discovery directly from Dominion, Powell already has a lot of documents and other evidence to prove the truth of her statements and defend against the complaint. Also, I assume, the people who assisted her will be ready, willing and able to provide testimony and other evidence to establish the truth of her claims.

  16. The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to Satori For This Post:

    Alan (13th January 2021), avid (13th January 2021), Ben (13th January 2021), Bill Ryan (13th January 2021), Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021), fifi (13th January 2021), Gemma13 (14th January 2021), iota (13th January 2021), onevoice (13th January 2021), pueblo (13th January 2021), ramus (13th January 2021), Reinhard (13th January 2021), Sadieblue (13th January 2021), Savannah (13th January 2021), T Smith (13th January 2021), TargeT (13th January 2021)

  17. Link to Post #1989
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    8th May 2017
    Location
    TX, USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    2,119
    Thanks
    7,405
    Thanked 14,546 times in 2,065 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    Quote Posted by Satori (here)
    Quote Posted by TargeT (here)
    Quote Posted by Gemma13 (here)
    SATORI: Is it at all conceivable that Sidney Powell being sued will bring to light the evidence she claims to have that couldn't get heard in court before 5 Jan?

    This article claims Dominion is suing Powell for 1.3 billion:

    https://reason.com/2021/01/11/sidney...ally-cost-her/
    yes, via discovery...assuming this goes to court and doesn't get bounced via a technicality like everything else seems to be.

    I agree generally with Target. But I will add that this case is not likely to get bounced, at least not right out of the gate like the cases brought for Trump, because it is brought by Dominion against Powell, not by Powell or her client against Dominion.

    Also, the claims are different and more traditional and well-established. That is, they do not directly challenge the election steal, excuse me, results. I understand the claims against her are essentially defamation and injury to business. (I have not read the complaint.)

    As far as discovery, the rules exist for Powell to discover the evidence necessary to defend the claims against her, which defense is at its core truth. But, the judge has the power to put limits on that. I expect dominion will resist any discovery that opens up the black box and provides transparency for Powell to defend herself and prove her statements are true. The will claim such things as trade secret, confidentiality, immunity, and that state secrets and national security security are implicated.

    It will be up to the judge to sort out discovery disputes. Hopefully, but remains to be seen, a fair and honest judge has been or will be assigned to the case.

    Powell may have counterclaims she will bring against Dominion too. See may also seek to join or add other parties to the lawsuit. This will also provide grounds for discovery; if her claims, if any, are not dismissed.

    If I were her I’d try to get the case dismissed, but that will be hard, and failing that, keep it as simple as possible and not add parties. There will be an army of lawyers working against her as it is and she would do well to not cause more of them to step on the field of play.
    so what, if any, would be the ramifications of her electing disclosure to others?

    because they will do EXACTLY what you said, and in fact, may be THE motive.

    which is, through discovery, find out exactly what it is that she has. they must have a pretty good idea, but they don't KNOW

    this suit is precisely the opportunity to find out, and to find out in PRIVACY, as it MUST be disclosed through the process of discovery.

    so it was a very smart move on their part to find out the extent and limits of the "goods" at her disposal.

    the other factor is precisely what you mentioned, the judge will have discretion to rule whether or not the evidence she has is not just admissible or not? but whether it will fall under "national security" and therefore be denied (repressed).

    IF (when) that happens? will she now ALSO be barred, prohibited from disclosure of said evidence to the public or ever again.

    if not? THAT is their game. they will find out exactly what she has, the judge will deny its admissibility and cite National Security issues and in the process bury the evidence forever

    the dems will spin it as "see she had nothing"

    and i notice as you speak and describe the judicial process i sense an underlying confidence or assumption that it WILL be on the up and up. is that truly your perspective? because it sure seemed that the judgments and opinions of the judges were a foregone conclusion in the previous cases ... and were i Dominion?

    i would not consider bringing a case forth to which i had NOT assurances of cooperation from the judge. THAT would be matter number one on my list to check off ...

    always, always look forward to your reply and hope everyone at Avalon understands how fortunate we are to have access to your experience and your opinion.

    thanks Satori, really appreciate it and you!
    We should defend our way of life
    to an extent that any attempt on it is crushed,

    so that any adversary
    will never make such an attempt in the future.

  18. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to iota For This Post:

    Arcturian108 (13th January 2021), Ben (13th January 2021), Bill Ryan (13th January 2021), ClearWater (13th January 2021), Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021), fifi (13th January 2021), greybeard (13th January 2021), onevoice (13th January 2021), pabranno (13th January 2021), pueblo (13th January 2021), Reinhard (13th January 2021), Sadieblue (13th January 2021)

  19. Link to Post #1990
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    24th January 2014
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado
    Language
    English
    Age
    65
    Posts
    282
    Thanks
    397
    Thanked 2,504 times in 274 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    Interesting comments here from Kerry Cassidy. I dont believe everything she says but it's usually worthy of consideration. She does touch on Simon Parkes, who I am not a big fan of. FWIW..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPgM...st=WL&index=19

  20. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to TravelerJim For This Post:

    ClearWater (13th January 2021), Deborah (ahamkara) (13th January 2021), Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021), greybeard (13th January 2021), thepainterdoug (13th January 2021)

  21. Link to Post #1991
    United States Avalon Member thepainterdoug's Avatar
    Join Date
    27th November 2013
    Age
    70
    Posts
    3,216
    Thanks
    11,007
    Thanked 33,162 times in 3,159 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    I want to like Simon. I want to like everyone. But the Simon, Robert David Steele interview bothered me. Simon showing up on this topic at this time, similar to Mike Adams, "the health ranger"

    Mike went way fear porn overboard with Covid, predicting millions dead, famine, and so on. now its the election.

    I suppose there is a business in clicks, and I feel they are putting clicks first over responsible news.

  22. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to thepainterdoug For This Post:

    ClearWater (13th January 2021), Deborah (ahamkara) (13th January 2021), Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021), gord (15th January 2021), Journeyman (13th January 2021), pueblo (13th January 2021), PurpleLama (13th January 2021), wegge (13th January 2021)

  23. Link to Post #1992
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    26th May 2010
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM, USA
    Age
    73
    Posts
    2,450
    Thanks
    11,327
    Thanked 22,061 times in 2,419 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    Quote Posted by iota (here)
    Quote Posted by Satori (here)
    Quote Posted by TargeT (here)
    Quote Posted by Gemma13 (here)
    SATORI: Is it at all conceivable that Sidney Powell being sued will bring to light the evidence she claims to have that couldn't get heard in court before 5 Jan?

    This article claims Dominion is suing Powell for 1.3 billion:

    https://reason.com/2021/01/11/sidney...ally-cost-her/
    yes, via discovery...assuming this goes to court and doesn't get bounced via a technicality like everything else seems to be.

    I agree generally with Target. But I will add that this case is not likely to get bounced, at least not right out of the gate like the cases brought for Trump, because it is brought by Dominion against Powell, not by Powell or her client against Dominion.

    Also, the claims are different and more traditional and well-established. That is, they do not directly challenge the election steal, excuse me, results. I understand the claims against her are essentially defamation and injury to business. (I have not read the complaint.)

    As far as discovery, the rules exist for Powell to discover the evidence necessary to defend the claims against her, which defense is at its core truth. But, the judge has the power to put limits on that. I expect dominion will resist any discovery that opens up the black box and provides transparency for Powell to defend herself and prove her statements are true. The will claim such things as trade secret, confidentiality, immunity, and that state secrets and national security security are implicated.

    It will be up to the judge to sort out discovery disputes. Hopefully, but remains to be seen, a fair and honest judge has been or will be assigned to the case.

    Powell may have counterclaims she will bring against Dominion too. See may also seek to join or add other parties to the lawsuit. This will also provide grounds for discovery; if her claims, if any, are not dismissed.

    If I were her I’d try to get the case dismissed, but that will be hard, and failing that, keep it as simple as possible and not add parties. There will be an army of lawyers working against her as it is and she would do well to not cause more of them to step on the field of play.
    so what, if any, would be the ramifications of her electing disclosure to others?

    because they will do EXACTLY what you said, and in fact, may be THE motive.

    which is, through discovery, find out exactly what it is that she has. they must have a pretty good idea, but they don't KNOW

    this suit is precisely the opportunity to find out, and to find out in PRIVACY, as it MUST be disclosed through the process of discovery.

    so it was a very smart move on their part to find out the extent and limits of the "goods" at her disposal.

    the other factor is precisely what you mentioned, the judge will have discretion to rule whether or not the evidence she has is not just admissible or not? but whether it will fall under "national security" and therefore be denied (repressed).

    IF (when) that happens? will she now ALSO be barred, prohibited from disclosure of said evidence to the public or ever again.

    if not? THAT is their game. they will find out exactly what she has, the judge will deny its admissibility and cite National Security issues and in the process bury the evidence forever

    the dems will spin it as "see she had nothing"

    and i notice as you speak and describe the judicial process i sense an underlying confidence or assumption that it WILL be on the up and up. is that truly your perspective? because it sure seemed that the judgments and opinions of the judges were a foregone conclusion in the previous cases ... and were i Dominion?

    i would not consider bringing a case forth to which i had NOT assurances of cooperation from the judge. THAT would be matter number one on my list to check off ...

    always, always look forward to your reply and hope everyone at Avalon understands how fortunate we are to have access to your experience and your opinion.

    thanks Satori, really appreciate it and you!
    First let me address your sense of my confidence or assumption that the judicial process in Powell's case will be on the up and up. I do not think for a minute that things are always on the up and up within our judicial system. In fact, the longer I've been in this racket, the less confident I am that the system is blind and that achieving justice and fairness is the goal of all judges. Some (maybe many) yes, all no

    Typically, routine, day-to-day cases proceed properly and more or less fairly. But when and where more politically, economically and socially important issues are at stake, and the more powerful the parties (or a party), the more likely a judge's biases and such will arise in a case. Judges are not stupid and they know how to cover their tracks and cloak any irregularities and shenanigans in legal procedure and in their interpretation and application of substantive law to the "facts". And, 80% to 90% of the time what a trial judge does is upheld by the "higher" courts that review what the trial judge did.

    Discovery is supposed to be a two-way street. Theoretically, all sides in a civil lawsuit are required to disclose all relevant information to each other. In federal court, (and some state courts) there are mandatory rule 26 "initial disclosures' that a party is required to make to the other parties without a request for such information. Beyond that, a party must request information in the form of such discovery tools as interrogatories, requests for production, request for inspection, and depositions.

    There are a number of exceptions to the disclosure or discovery requirements, such as attorney-client privileged information and in civil cases, trade secrets can get some protection. However, as to trade secrets, the remedy there is for a judge to require the disclosure, but make it subject to a protective or confidentiality order so that it is not released to the general public and/or competitors. Judges don't always do that. They sometimes do not require the disclosure at all.

    The judge will have the discretion to decide what is discoverable, and if there is an evidentiary hearing or trial, what is admissible into evidence. What is discoverable prior to any hearing or trial and what is admissible into evidence at any hearing or trial are two different things. Discovery is much broader. Admissibility is much narrower. Judges are more likely to allow discovery, but then at any hearing or trial they may not allow some information into evidence for any number of reasons within the judge's discretion. What matters in any legitimate court case is not just what is discovered, but what is discovered and admissible. However, if the purpose of a case is not to take it to trial, but rather to discover information for other purposes, such as political purposes, then it does not matter if the information is admitted into evidence.

    It is my opinion that Dominion does not expect to recover any money from Powell and that it really does not want to pursue the case to trial. Rather, it wants to destroy Powell emotionally and financially and has unleashed its lawyers for that purpose. It may as you seem to suggest seek to use discovery to get the goods and identify the players and such. But that is pretty much already out there. However, there are likely people operating behind the scenes who "they" want to identify for political purposes and the like, not for legitimate litigation purposes.

  24. The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to Satori For This Post:

    Alan (13th January 2021), atman (13th January 2021), Bill Ryan (13th January 2021), BushPilot (13th January 2021), ClearWater (13th January 2021), Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021), fifi (14th January 2021), iota (13th January 2021), Journeyman (13th January 2021), Merkaba360 (14th January 2021), pueblo (13th January 2021), PurpleLama (13th January 2021), ramus (15th January 2021), Sadieblue (14th January 2021), TargeT (13th January 2021), The Moss Trooper (13th January 2021)

  25. Link to Post #1993
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    8th May 2017
    Location
    TX, USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    2,119
    Thanks
    7,405
    Thanked 14,546 times in 2,065 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    Quote Posted by Satori (here)
    Quote Posted by iota (here)
    Quote Posted by Satori (here)
    Quote Posted by TargeT (here)
    Quote Posted by Gemma13 (here)
    SATORI: Is it at all conceivable that Sidney Powell being sued will bring to light the evidence she claims to have that couldn't get heard in court before 5 Jan?

    This article claims Dominion is suing Powell for 1.3 billion:

    https://reason.com/2021/01/11/sidney...ally-cost-her/
    yes, via discovery...assuming this goes to court and doesn't get bounced via a technicality like everything else seems to be.

    I agree generally with Target. But I will add that this case is not likely to get bounced, at least not right out of the gate like the cases brought for Trump, because it is brought by Dominion against Powell, not by Powell or her client against Dominion.

    Also, the claims are different and more traditional and well-established. That is, they do not directly challenge the election steal, excuse me, results. I understand the claims against her are essentially defamation and injury to business. (I have not read the complaint.)

    As far as discovery, the rules exist for Powell to discover the evidence necessary to defend the claims against her, which defense is at its core truth. But, the judge has the power to put limits on that. I expect dominion will resist any discovery that opens up the black box and provides transparency for Powell to defend herself and prove her statements are true. The will claim such things as trade secret, confidentiality, immunity, and that state secrets and national security security are implicated.

    It will be up to the judge to sort out discovery disputes. Hopefully, but remains to be seen, a fair and honest judge has been or will be assigned to the case.

    Powell may have counterclaims she will bring against Dominion too. See may also seek to join or add other parties to the lawsuit. This will also provide grounds for discovery; if her claims, if any, are not dismissed.

    If I were her I’d try to get the case dismissed, but that will be hard, and failing that, keep it as simple as possible and not add parties. There will be an army of lawyers working against her as it is and she would do well to not cause more of them to step on the field of play.
    so what, if any, would be the ramifications of her electing disclosure to others?

    because they will do EXACTLY what you said, and in fact, may be THE motive.

    which is, through discovery, find out exactly what it is that she has. they must have a pretty good idea, but they don't KNOW

    this suit is precisely the opportunity to find out, and to find out in PRIVACY, as it MUST be disclosed through the process of discovery.

    so it was a very smart move on their part to find out the extent and limits of the "goods" at her disposal.

    the other factor is precisely what you mentioned, the judge will have discretion to rule whether or not the evidence she has is not just admissible or not? but whether it will fall under "national security" and therefore be denied (repressed).

    IF (when) that happens? will she now ALSO be barred, prohibited from disclosure of said evidence to the public or ever again.

    if not? THAT is their game. they will find out exactly what she has, the judge will deny its admissibility and cite National Security issues and in the process bury the evidence forever

    the dems will spin it as "see she had nothing"

    and i notice as you speak and describe the judicial process i sense an underlying confidence or assumption that it WILL be on the up and up. is that truly your perspective? because it sure seemed that the judgments and opinions of the judges were a foregone conclusion in the previous cases ... and were i Dominion?

    i would not consider bringing a case forth to which i had NOT assurances of cooperation from the judge. THAT would be matter number one on my list to check off ...

    always, always look forward to your reply and hope everyone at Avalon understands how fortunate we are to have access to your experience and your opinion.

    thanks Satori, really appreciate it and you!
    First let me address your sense of my confidence or assumption that the judicial process in Powell's case will be on the up and up. I do not think for a minute that things are always on the up and up within our judicial system. In fact, the longer I've been in this racket, the less confident I am that the system is blind and that achieving justice and fairness is the goal of all judges. Some (maybe many) yes, all no

    Typically, routine, day-to-day cases proceed properly and more or less fairly. But when and where more politically, economically and socially important issues are at stake, and the more powerful the parties (or a party), the more likely a judge's biases and such will arise in a case. Judges are not stupid and they know how to cover their tracks and cloak any irregularities and shenanigans in legal procedure and in their interpretation and application of substantive law to the "facts". And, 80% to 90% of the time what a trial judge does is upheld by the "higher" courts that review what the trial judge did.

    Discovery is supposed to be a two-way street. Theoretically, all sides in a civil lawsuit are required to disclose all relevant information to each other. In federal court, (and some state courts) there are mandatory rule 26 "initial disclosures' that a party is required to make to the other parties without a request for such information. Beyond that, a party must request information in the form of such discovery tools as interrogatories, requests for production, request for inspection, and depositions.

    There are a number of exceptions to the disclosure or discovery requirements, such as attorney-client privileged information and in civil cases, trade secrets can get some protection. However, as to trade secrets, the remedy there is for a judge to require the disclosure, but make it subject to a protective or confidentiality order so that it is not released to the general public and/or competitors. Judges don't always do that. They sometimes do not require the disclosure at all.

    The judge will have the discretion to decide what is discoverable, and if there is an evidentiary hearing or trial, what is admissible into evidence. What is discoverable prior to any hearing or trial and what is admissible into evidence at any hearing or trial are two different things. Discovery is much broader. Admissibility is much narrower. Judges are more likely to allow discovery, but then at any hearing or trial they may not allow some information into evidence for any number of reasons within the judge's discretion. What matters in any legitimate court case is not just what is discovered, but what is discovered and admissible. However, if the purpose of a case is not to take it to trial, but rather to discover information for other purposes, such as political purposes, then it does not matter if the information is admitted into evidence.

    It is my opinion that Dominion does not expect to recover any money from Powell and that it really does not want to pursue the case to trial. Rather, it wants to destroy Powell emotionally and financially and has unleashed its lawyers for that purpose. It may as you seem to suggest seek to use discovery to get the goods and identify the players and such. But that is pretty much already out there. However, there are likely people operating behind the scenes who "they" want to identify for political purposes and the like, not for legitimate litigation purposes.
    Thank you Satori ... and thanks for that clarification. In essence when you are describing and explaining the processes it is just that an explanation

    and not an assertion on your part that:

    "the system is blind and that achieving justice and fairness is the goal of all judges"

    nor that indeed, this is the way it is going to go ...

    because if that assumption were to be your belief i'd have to serioulsy question your judgment! hahaha! ... no ... but really i would have

    so the distinction is important ...

    and i agree wholeheartedly ...

    and thank you wholeheartedly as well!
    Last edited by iota; 13th January 2021 at 18:24. Reason: format, bold and typo
    We should defend our way of life
    to an extent that any attempt on it is crushed,

    so that any adversary
    will never make such an attempt in the future.

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to iota For This Post:

    Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021)

  27. Link to Post #1994
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    26th May 2010
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM, USA
    Age
    73
    Posts
    2,450
    Thanks
    11,327
    Thanked 22,061 times in 2,419 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    Quote Posted by Satori (here)
    Quote Posted by iota (here)
    Quote Posted by Satori (here)
    Quote Posted by TargeT (here)
    Quote Posted by Gemma13 (here)
    SATORI: Is it at all conceivable that Sidney Powell being sued will bring to light the evidence she claims to have that couldn't get heard in court before 5 Jan?

    This article claims Dominion is suing Powell for 1.3 billion:

    https://reason.com/2021/01/11/sidney...ally-cost-her/
    yes, via discovery...assuming this goes to court and doesn't get bounced via a technicality like everything else seems to be.

    I agree generally with Target. But I will add that this case is not likely to get bounced, at least not right out of the gate like the cases brought for Trump, because it is brought by Dominion against Powell, not by Powell or her client against Dominion.

    Also, the claims are different and more traditional and well-established. That is, they do not directly challenge the election steal, excuse me, results. I understand the claims against her are essentially defamation and injury to business. (I have not read the complaint.)

    As far as discovery, the rules exist for Powell to discover the evidence necessary to defend the claims against her, which defense is at its core truth. But, the judge has the power to put limits on that. I expect dominion will resist any discovery that opens up the black box and provides transparency for Powell to defend herself and prove her statements are true. The will claim such things as trade secret, confidentiality, immunity, and that state secrets and national security security are implicated.

    It will be up to the judge to sort out discovery disputes. Hopefully, but remains to be seen, a fair and honest judge has been or will be assigned to the case.

    Powell may have counterclaims she will bring against Dominion too. See may also seek to join or add other parties to the lawsuit. This will also provide grounds for discovery; if her claims, if any, are not dismissed.

    If I were her I’d try to get the case dismissed, but that will be hard, and failing that, keep it as simple as possible and not add parties. There will be an army of lawyers working against her as it is and she would do well to not cause more of them to step on the field of play.
    so what, if any, would be the ramifications of her electing disclosure to others?

    because they will do EXACTLY what you said, and in fact, may be THE motive.

    which is, through discovery, find out exactly what it is that she has. they must have a pretty good idea, but they don't KNOW

    this suit is precisely the opportunity to find out, and to find out in PRIVACY, as it MUST be disclosed through the process of discovery.

    so it was a very smart move on their part to find out the extent and limits of the "goods" at her disposal.

    the other factor is precisely what you mentioned, the judge will have discretion to rule whether or not the evidence she has is not just admissible or not? but whether it will fall under "national security" and therefore be denied (repressed).

    IF (when) that happens? will she now ALSO be barred, prohibited from disclosure of said evidence to the public or ever again.

    if not? THAT is their game. they will find out exactly what she has, the judge will deny its admissibility and cite National Security issues and in the process bury the evidence forever

    the dems will spin it as "see she had nothing"

    and i notice as you speak and describe the judicial process i sense an underlying confidence or assumption that it WILL be on the up and up. is that truly your perspective? because it sure seemed that the judgments and opinions of the judges were a foregone conclusion in the previous cases ... and were i Dominion?

    i would not consider bringing a case forth to which i had NOT assurances of cooperation from the judge. THAT would be matter number one on my list to check off ...

    always, always look forward to your reply and hope everyone at Avalon understands how fortunate we are to have access to your experience and your opinion.

    thanks Satori, really appreciate it and you!
    First let me address your sense of my confidence or assumption that the judicial process in Powell's case will be on the up and up. I do not think for a minute that things are always on the up and up within our judicial system. In fact, the longer I've been in this racket, the less confident I am that the system is blind and that achieving justice and fairness is the goal of all judges. Some (maybe many) yes, all no

    Typically, routine, day-to-day cases proceed properly and more or less fairly. But when and where more politically, economically and socially important issues are at stake, and the more powerful the parties (or a party), the more likely a judge's biases and such will arise in a case. Judges are not stupid and they know how to cover their tracks and cloak any irregularities and shenanigans in legal procedure and in their interpretation and application of substantive law to the "facts". And, 80% to 90% of the time what a trial judge does is upheld by the "higher" courts that review what the trial judge did.

    Discovery is supposed to be a two-way street. Theoretically, all sides in a civil lawsuit are required to disclose all relevant information to each other. In federal court, (and some state courts) there are mandatory rule 26 "initial disclosures' that a party is required to make to the other parties without a request for such information. Beyond that, a party must request information in the form of such discovery tools as interrogatories, requests for production, request for inspection, and depositions.

    There are a number of exceptions to the disclosure or discovery requirements, such as attorney-client privileged information and in civil cases, trade secrets can get some protection. However, as to trade secrets, the remedy there is for a judge to require the disclosure, but make it subject to a protective or confidentiality order so that it is not released to the general public and/or competitors. Judges don't always do that. They sometimes do not require the disclosure at all.

    The judge will have the discretion to decide what is discoverable, and if there is an evidentiary hearing or trial, what is admissible into evidence. What is discoverable prior to any hearing or trial and what is admissible into evidence at any hearing or trial are two different things. Discovery is much broader. Admissibility is much narrower. Judges are more likely to allow discovery, but then at any hearing or trial they may not allow some information into evidence for any number of reasons within the judge's discretion. What matters in any legitimate court case is not just what is discovered, but what is discovered and admissible. However, if the purpose of a case is not to take it to trial, but rather to discover information for other purposes, such as political purposes, then it does not matter if the information is admitted into evidence.

    It is my opinion that Dominion does not expect to recover any money from Powell and that it really does not want to pursue the case to trial. Rather, it wants to destroy Powell emotionally and financially and has unleashed its lawyers for that purpose. It may as you seem to suggest seek to use discovery to get the goods and identify the players and such. But that is pretty much already out there. However, there are likely people operating behind the scenes who "they" want to identify for political purposes and the like, not for legitimate litigation purposes.
    I do want to add one more thing about Dominion's motives for suing Powell and my belief that the lawsuit is designed to harass and destroy her, not to recover money or obtain other relief. And, the point I'm about to make will inure to Powell's benefit if she moves to dismiss the case, which she very likely will.

    The point is this, and I believe it applies in all states and in DC: A lawyer who is representing a client in potential or pending litigation has virtually absolute immunity from liability for any and all statements and other conduct reasonably related to the lawyers representation of the client in the potential or pending lawsuit. Thus, any alleged defamatory statements or such that Powell allegedly made in the conduct of the lawsuits she brought for her client(s) are privileged and may not form the basis for any liability on her part.

    So, if Powell files a motion to dismiss, I expect she will rely on that law, assuming it applies where this lawsuit is pending (DC I believe) to dismiss the case. The issue will be whether any alleged defamatory statements were made and whether if so they were reasonably related to her representation of her client. That is a fact test and would require discovery on the issues.

    I have not read the complaint against her, but I'm willing to bet a dollar to a hole in a donut, that there are allegations in the complaint that her statements were not reasonably related to her representation, but rather where motivated by a desire to injure Dominion and were known or should have been known to Powell to be false.

    Why aren't Linn Wood and Rudy G being sued? Or are they?

  28. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Satori For This Post:

    atman (13th January 2021), BushPilot (13th January 2021), ClearWater (13th January 2021), Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021), Ernie Nemeth (13th January 2021), fifi (14th January 2021), iota (13th January 2021), Journeyman (13th January 2021), onevoice (13th January 2021), selinam (13th January 2021)

  29. Link to Post #1995
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    8th May 2017
    Location
    TX, USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    2,119
    Thanks
    7,405
    Thanked 14,546 times in 2,065 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    Quote Posted by Satori (here)

    I have not read the complaint against her, but I'm willing to bet a dollar to a hole in a donut, that there are allegations in the complaint that her statements were not reasonably related to her representation, but rather where motivated by a desire to injure Dominion and were known or should have been known to Powell to be false.

    Why aren't Linn Wood and Rudy G being sued? Or are they?
    no they are not as of this moment, however, the FBI has declared intent to pursue investigation into Lin Wood in respect to allegations that he made statements on Parler that call for Mike Pence’s death by firing squad after Twitter suspension

    Wood is an attorney, and, if i remember correctly, he phrased the remarks couched between Treason or sedition

    death by a firing squad happens to be the penalty

    he is not responsible for that fact

    so i'm certain that will be the loophole he will be exonerated through and he planned in the first place

    similar instances are also being looked into of Rudy

    but THIS is WHY the distinction of what is a legitimate action
    (the definitions and explanations of the law you provide us)
    and what is actually transpiring are necessary

    and we need BOTH

    "this is the law and this is what i think they are likely doing"


    and what i know, is that said law and its ramifications and consequences for actions of hatred, violence, insurrection, defamation etc (the list is exhaustive) have been not largely, but COMPLETELY ignored in regards to our president

    and now there is a full force attempt to censor and silence ALL that would point this out

    therefore, it NEEDS to be pointed out otherwise, through silence, we are complicit in the "Spin"

    repeatedly may i add
    (refute ALL narratives that are indignant, with the hypocrisy and FACTS)

    but in my initial post, i was wondering

    1.) now that there is pending litigation is she (Powell) bound by any restraints in disclosure of the evidence she has

    2.) if the judge rules any of it to be matters of national security will that prohibit its release and disclosure at a future time? (past lawsuit)

    3.) THAT perhaps being the case, what would be the consequences of her distributing the evidence she has to others (like kill switch) in case the future imposes constraints upon her ability to do so?

    PS UPDATE


    Quote I'm willing to bet a dollar to a hole in a donut, that there are allegations in the complaint that her statements were not reasonably related to her representation, but rather where motivated by a desire to injure Dominion and were known or should have been known to Powell to be false.
    i assume this point to be the determining factor as to whether the suit will, in fact, proceed through the judicial process or be her cause to call for dismissal ... pretty certain both sides will present strong argument for their respective points ,,,

    Last edited by iota; 13th January 2021 at 20:23. Reason: wrong quote quoted
    We should defend our way of life
    to an extent that any attempt on it is crushed,

    so that any adversary
    will never make such an attempt in the future.

  30. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to iota For This Post:

    ClearWater (13th January 2021), Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021), greybeard (13th January 2021), ramus (15th January 2021)

  31. Link to Post #1996
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    26th May 2010
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM, USA
    Age
    73
    Posts
    2,450
    Thanks
    11,327
    Thanked 22,061 times in 2,419 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    Quote Posted by iota (here)
    Quote Posted by Satori (here)

    I have not read the complaint against her, but I'm willing to bet a dollar to a hole in a donut, that there are allegations in the complaint that her statements were not reasonably related to her representation, but rather where motivated by a desire to injure Dominion and were known or should have been known to Powell to be false.

    Why aren't Linn Wood and Rudy G being sued? Or are they?
    no they are not as of this moment, however, the FBI has declared intent to pursue investigation into Lin Wood in respect to allegations that he made statements on Parler that they allege call for Mike Pence’s death by firing squad after Twitter suspension

    Wood is an attorney, and, if i remember correctly, he phrased the remarks couched between Treason or sedition

    death by a firing squad happens to be the penalty

    he is not responsible for that fact

    so i'm certain that will be the loophole he will be exonerated through and he planned in the first place

    similar instances are also being looked into of Rudy

    but THIS is WHY the distinction of what is a legitimate action
    (the definitions and explanations of the law you provide us)
    and what is actually transpiring are necessary

    and we need BOTH

    "this is the law and this is what i think they are likely doing"


    and what i know, is that said law and its ramifications and consequences for actions of hatred, violence, insurrection, defamation etc (the list is exhaustive) have been not largely, but COMPLETELY ignored in regards to our president

    and now there is a full force attempt to censor and silence ALL that would point this out

    therefore, it NEEDS to be pointed out otherwise, through silence, we are complicit in the "Spin"

    repeatedly may i add
    (refute ALL narratives that are indignant, with the hypocrisy and FACTS)

    but in my initial post, i was wondering

    1.) now that there is pending litigation is she (Powell) bound by any restraints in disclosure of the evidence she has

    2.) if the judge rules any of it to be matters of national security will that prohibit its release and disclosure at a future time? (past lawsuit)

    3.) THAT perhaps being the case, what would be the consequences of her distributing the evidence she has to others (like kill switch) in case the future imposes constraints upon her ability to do so?

    PS UPDATE


    Quote I'm willing to bet a dollar to a hole in a donut, that there are allegations in the complaint that her statements were not reasonably related to her representation, but rather where motivated by a desire to injure Dominion and were known or should have been known to Powell to be false.
    i assume this point to be the determining factor as to whether the suit will, in fact, proceed through the judicial process or be her cause to call for dismissal ... pretty certain both sides will present strong argument for their respective points ,,,

    iota,

    Forgive me but I do not have enough information to answer these questions in a meaningful way.

    What I could add would be too abstract and theoretical and not tethered to operative facts.

    Also, I have no information about the existence of, or the details and terms of, any orders that may bear upon the question of what information is subject to an order prohibiting the use or dissemination of any evidence she has.

    I tend to think there is/are no such order(s) because she has been fairly forthcoming with select information, including the 270 page "report" she released a while back. I put "report" in quotes because in my view what she put out there was simply a series of documents. It's more of a compilation, than a report.

  32. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Satori For This Post:

    Alan (13th January 2021), ClearWater (13th January 2021), Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021), iota (13th January 2021), Journeyman (13th January 2021), ramus (15th January 2021)

  33. Link to Post #1997
    Avalon Member The Moss Trooper's Avatar
    Join Date
    21st May 2017
    Posts
    677
    Thanks
    959
    Thanked 4,838 times in 650 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    Quote Posted by Satori (here)
    Quote Posted by iota (here)
    Quote Posted by Satori (here)
    Quote Posted by TargeT (here)
    Quote Posted by Gemma13 (here)
    SATORI: Is it at all conceivable that Sidney Powell being sued will bring to light the evidence she claims to have that couldn't get heard in court before 5 Jan?

    This article claims Dominion is suing Powell for 1.3 billion:

    https://reason.com/2021/01/11/sidney...ally-cost-her/
    yes, via discovery...assuming this goes to court and doesn't get bounced via a technicality like everything else seems to be.

    I agree generally with Target. But I will add that this case is not likely to get bounced, at least not right out of the gate like the cases brought for Trump, because it is brought by Dominion against Powell, not by Powell or her client against Dominion.

    Also, the claims are different and more traditional and well-established. That is, they do not directly challenge the election steal, excuse me, results. I understand the claims against her are essentially defamation and injury to business. (I have not read the complaint.)

    As far as discovery, the rules exist for Powell to discover the evidence necessary to defend the claims against her, which defense is at its core truth. But, the judge has the power to put limits on that. I expect dominion will resist any discovery that opens up the black box and provides transparency for Powell to defend herself and prove her statements are true. The will claim such things as trade secret, confidentiality, immunity, and that state secrets and national security security are implicated.

    It will be up to the judge to sort out discovery disputes. Hopefully, but remains to be seen, a fair and honest judge has been or will be assigned to the case.

    Powell may have counterclaims she will bring against Dominion too. See may also seek to join or add other parties to the lawsuit. This will also provide grounds for discovery; if her claims, if any, are not dismissed.

    If I were her I’d try to get the case dismissed, but that will be hard, and failing that, keep it as simple as possible and not add parties. There will be an army of lawyers working against her as it is and she would do well to not cause more of them to step on the field of play.
    so what, if any, would be the ramifications of her electing disclosure to others?

    because they will do EXACTLY what you said, and in fact, may be THE motive.

    which is, through discovery, find out exactly what it is that she has. they must have a pretty good idea, but they don't KNOW

    this suit is precisely the opportunity to find out, and to find out in PRIVACY, as it MUST be disclosed through the process of discovery.

    so it was a very smart move on their part to find out the extent and limits of the "goods" at her disposal.

    the other factor is precisely what you mentioned, the judge will have discretion to rule whether or not the evidence she has is not just admissible or not? but whether it will fall under "national security" and therefore be denied (repressed).

    IF (when) that happens? will she now ALSO be barred, prohibited from disclosure of said evidence to the public or ever again.

    if not? THAT is their game. they will find out exactly what she has, the judge will deny its admissibility and cite National Security issues and in the process bury the evidence forever

    the dems will spin it as "see she had nothing"

    and i notice as you speak and describe the judicial process i sense an underlying confidence or assumption that it WILL be on the up and up. is that truly your perspective? because it sure seemed that the judgments and opinions of the judges were a foregone conclusion in the previous cases ... and were i Dominion?

    i would not consider bringing a case forth to which i had NOT assurances of cooperation from the judge. THAT would be matter number one on my list to check off ...

    always, always look forward to your reply and hope everyone at Avalon understands how fortunate we are to have access to your experience and your opinion.

    thanks Satori, really appreciate it and you!
    First let me address your sense of my confidence or assumption that the judicial process in Powell's case will be on the up and up. I do not think for a minute that things are always on the up and up within our judicial system. In fact, the longer I've been in this racket, the less confident I am that the system is blind and that achieving justice and fairness is the goal of all judges. Some (maybe many) yes, all no

    Typically, routine, day-to-day cases proceed properly and more or less fairly. But when and where more politically, economically and socially important issues are at stake, and the more powerful the parties (or a party), the more likely a judge's biases and such will arise in a case. Judges are not stupid and they know how to cover their tracks and cloak any irregularities and shenanigans in legal procedure and in their interpretation and application of substantive law to the "facts". And, 80% to 90% of the time what a trial judge does is upheld by the "higher" courts that review what the trial judge did.

    Discovery is supposed to be a two-way street. Theoretically, all sides in a civil lawsuit are required to disclose all relevant information to each other. In federal court, (and some state courts) there are mandatory rule 26 "initial disclosures' that a party is required to make to the other parties without a request for such information. Beyond that, a party must request information in the form of such discovery tools as interrogatories, requests for production, request for inspection, and depositions.

    There are a number of exceptions to the disclosure or discovery requirements, such as attorney-client privileged information and in civil cases, trade secrets can get some protection. However, as to trade secrets, the remedy there is for a judge to require the disclosure, but make it subject to a protective or confidentiality order so that it is not released to the general public and/or competitors. Judges don't always do that. They sometimes do not require the disclosure at all.

    The judge will have the discretion to decide what is discoverable, and if there is an evidentiary hearing or trial, what is admissible into evidence. What is discoverable prior to any hearing or trial and what is admissible into evidence at any hearing or trial are two different things. Discovery is much broader. Admissibility is much narrower. Judges are more likely to allow discovery, but then at any hearing or trial they may not allow some information into evidence for any number of reasons within the judge's discretion. What matters in any legitimate court case is not just what is discovered, but what is discovered and admissible. However, if the purpose of a case is not to take it to trial, but rather to discover information for other purposes, such as political purposes, then it does not matter if the information is admitted into evidence.

    It is my opinion that Dominion does not expect to recover any money from Powell and that it really does not want to pursue the case to trial. Rather, it wants to destroy Powell emotionally and financially and has unleashed its lawyers for that purpose. It may as you seem to suggest seek to use discovery to get the goods and identify the players and such. But that is pretty much already out there. However, there are likely people operating behind the scenes who "they" want to identify for political purposes and the like, not for legitimate litigation purposes.

    I'll never forget the words of the Bailiff to me before sentencing before the Royal Court. In response to my protest, he retorted, " Mr *****, this is a court of law........ Not a court of justice"

    It really was a "lightbulb" moment for me, because there and then, I knew I was in deep sh*t!


    May your Spirit stay unbroken, may you not be deterred.

  34. The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to The Moss Trooper For This Post:

    avid (13th January 2021), BushPilot (13th January 2021), ClearWater (13th January 2021), Eric J (Viking) (13th January 2021), Ernie Nemeth (13th January 2021), Eva2 (13th January 2021), Franny (13th January 2021), gord (15th January 2021), greybeard (13th January 2021), happyuk (15th January 2021), iota (13th January 2021), Journeyman (13th January 2021), PurpleLama (13th January 2021), ramus (15th January 2021), Satori (13th January 2021), selinam (13th January 2021)

  35. Link to Post #1998
    Avalon Member Eric J (Viking)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    16th March 2010
    Location
    Stockbridge Hampshire UK
    Posts
    4,623
    Thanks
    13,099
    Thanked 24,157 times in 3,105 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    THE BIGGEST STING OPERATION IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD?

    https://rumble.com/vcqdt7-the-bigges...9ceev&mc=ewucg

    Viking
    You decide...your thoughts..your actions..your reality.
    Choose well.
    https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...are-the-change

  36. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Eric J (Viking) For This Post:

    Arcturian108 (13th January 2021), greybeard (13th January 2021), LifeAngel (15th January 2021), onevoice (13th January 2021), ramus (15th January 2021), Rawhide68 (13th January 2021), selinam (13th January 2021)

  37. Link to Post #1999
    Netherlands Avalon Member ExomatrixTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2011
    Location
    Netherlands
    Language
    English, Dutch, German, Limburgs
    Age
    57
    Posts
    22,729
    Thanks
    30,829
    Thanked 125,735 times in 20,828 posts

    Exclamation Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)

    • BREAKING: Raquel Rodriguez ARRESTED by Texas AG on FOUR felony charges relating to voter fraud!



    Project Veritas
    • WATCH: Veritas Journalist Captures Exact Moment Judge ORDERS Steel Barriers Come Down In Fulton Co.

    Source: https://www.bitchute.com/video/55yRxkR7QZw

    Last edited by ExomatrixTV; 13th January 2021 at 23:13.
    No need to follow anyone, only consider broadening (y)our horizon of possibilities ...

  38. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to ExomatrixTV For This Post:

    BushPilot (13th January 2021), chrifri (14th January 2021), Eric J (Viking) (14th January 2021), greybeard (14th January 2021), ramus (15th January 2021)

  39. Link to Post #2000
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    8th May 2017
    Location
    TX, USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    2,119
    Thanks
    7,405
    Thanked 14,546 times in 2,065 posts

    Default Re: MASSIVE FRAUD: Major Lawsuits (update: all foiled so far)


    Here Al Dershowitz eloquently and in GREAT detail argues against the impeachment citing fact, precedent, intent in the origination and formulation OF the Impeachment Process and presented evidence to the effect both at the time of formation and shortly thereafter.

    he presented law

    ALL of the FACTS he presented were unceremoniously ignored

    and they proceeded with the actions that they intended.

    THIS is what has been going on.

    THIS was the basis of my question

    when we want to understand what is transpiring

    we need to understand TWO levels

    one, what is the law

    two what they are doing IN SPITE OF the law

    at this point, understanding of the law is occurring more and more as "forrmality" since it is going to be interpreted AND acted upon AS THEY see fit TO interpret and act upon it

    when Satori responded he didn't have a meaningful way of responding to my question, he was correct in his assessment as there IS NO MEANINGFUL way to provide a response at THIS time. i'm certain that those that did not fully understand interpreted that to mean my questions were not meaningful, that assumption would be actually amusing

    and IF he were to provide a response?

    under which factors?

    he is and DOES provide us with exceptional answers as to WHAT the law IS and what it is designed to do and permitted under the law

    however, NONE of that has played out

    you all DO understand that, right?

    if you don't then simply take ANY of the allegations and accusations now leveled against our president or against us his supporters

    and were you to do research (which means NEVER USING GOOGLE)

    you would find a disproportionate amount of instances to levels of unprecedented heights

    almost akin to a child vs a murderer

    taking action both in scope, degree AND continuation AND repetition

    if they are furious that we demonstrated ONCE

    show them THE DOZENS of times they ANGRILY and FURIOUSLY demonstrated

    we did it because we have EVIDENCE of FRAUD

    they did it because they wanted to get their way

    they didn't want Brett Kavanaugh .. and THAT entitled them to STORM our capital

    ok


    WE DID NOT want a Chinese asset (tons of video of China openly celebrating and bragging that this is the case)

    or compromised criminal (that like cohorts hillary and hussein will NEVER be investigated)

    and it went on and on and on and on


    BUT ... those were called "rallies"

    ours ... ONE time for a few hours ... is being labeled terrorist action

    the BLM is STILL labeled as "mostly peaceful"

    this was JUST SIX DAYS earlier ... NEW YEAR's


    just ONE of them, just ONE "peaceful demonstration"? ~ lasted SEVEN days and COST over 2 BILLION in damages ..

    so you see why i would ask and would be completely negligent if i did not consider the fact that, there is the law, and there is the application OF said law which today are TWO different things

    but make no mistake ... this is only because we allowed it ..

    we don't HAVE to continue doing that ..

    Last edited by iota; 14th January 2021 at 04:12.
    We should defend our way of life
    to an extent that any attempt on it is crushed,

    so that any adversary
    will never make such an attempt in the future.

  40. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to iota For This Post:

    ClearWater (14th January 2021), Eric J (Viking) (14th January 2021), Ernie Nemeth (14th January 2021), greybeard (14th January 2021), ramus (15th January 2021)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 100 of 124 FirstFirst 1 50 90 100 110 124 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts