This is not at all just an enjoyable tit for tat fight among prominent Trump-supporting officials. This is actually a very big deal involving big players in the post-election fight.
Tucker Carlson has been called “the most influential media host on television.” Obviously, they are talking about people on the right and middle that watch Fox as being influenced. Liberals wouldn’t trust Tucker to teach them how to make toast. Moreover, the left doesn’t watch television as much (too busy reading) and so it’s not surprising that Tucker gets that label.
Tucker Carlson went after Sydney Powell last night and he had good reason. He said that Powell – during the press conference in which she claimed Trump won by a landslide due to millions of foreign votes – had just claimed that the “crime of the century” occurred and asked her for evidence. Indeed, Tucker said he would have given her the entire hour or even entire week if she had evidence to back up her claim. It appears Powell doesn’t have evidence to back up her claim (we’re shocked) and took his words quite personally.
Powell went on Maria Bartiromo’s show this morning because Maria will allow anyone to say anything for Donald Trump and said of Tucker:
“No, I didn’t get angry with the request to provide evidence,” Powell replied. “In fact, I sent an affidavit to Tucker that I had not even attached to a pleading yet to help him understand the situation, and I offered him another witness who could explain the math and the statistical evidence far better than I can. I’m not really a numbers person.” Powell then concluded about Mr. Carlson, “He was insulting, demanding and rude, and I told him not to contact me again, in those terms.”
Please do notice that she offered an affidavit that “I had not even attached to a pleading yet …” She could have easily added, “Nor will I ever.” Because if she’s close to having her case kicked out, an attorney’s affidavit would make a big difference because it’s presumed to be correct. It’s a crime to submit one that is not correct and something the bar would discipline severely. Statisticians? Tell us what they could testify to that would matter at all?
What did Tucker say that was so awful?
“Sidney Powell has been saying similar things for days. On Sunday night, we texted her after watching one of her segments. What Powell was describing what amounts to the single greatest crime in American history,” Carlson noted. “Millions of votes stolen in the day. Democracy destroyed, the end of our centuries-old system of self-government, not a small thing.”
“We invited Sidney Powell on this show, we would’ve given her the whole hour, we would’ve given her the entire week and listen quietly the whole time at rapt attention — that is a big story,” the Fox host added, before calling out the conservative lawyer for a pattern of failing to back her outlandish election fraud claims. “But she never sent us any evidence despite a lot of requests, polite requests, not a page.
We aren’t sure what got into Tucker but evidently, he plans to be on a life boat when the Titanic when it goes under. And it isn’t surprising in the least that the loudest Trump lawyer with the brashest claims has exactly nothing with respect to evidence. As we have said a million times, her audience isn’t the court, she’s not trying to win a “case.” She is trying to persuade the base, so the base is furious and demands that the legislators send their own electors.
So far it’s not working.
[email protected] and Twitter @JasonMiciak