On Thursday, Rudy Giuliani and a number of President Trump’s other lawyers held a press conference on the topic of voter fraud – covered extensively on YWN.
But on Thursday night, Fox News host Tucker Carlson – one of Trump’s biggest allies in the media – repeatedly asked Sidney Powell, an attorney for President Donald Trump, for evidence of the widespread voter fraud evidence she claims to possess, but he says she never provided a single piece of evidence to his show.
Instead, he claims the former prosecutor grew angry and demanded that his show stop contacting her when they pressed her for evidence.
In the press conference, Powell claimed there was “massive influence of communist money through Venezuela, Cuba, and likely China, and interference with our elections.” But she didn’t offer proof.
Carlson’s comments ignited a firestorm of criticism from conservatives on social media who are already upset at Fox News for its early call of Arizona for Joe Biden. Trump supporters are now bashing Tucker Carlson, who has been one of the President’s biggest supporters and defenders every night for the past four years.
WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW:
Powell responded on Fox this morning:
“No, I didn’t get angry with the request to provide evidence,” the former federal prosecutor said Friday morning during an interview with Fox Business.
“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 mathematics and the statistical evidence far better than I can. I’m not really a numbers person,” she added.
“But he was very insulting, demanding, and rude, and I told him not to contact me again, in those terms,” Powell concluded.
WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW:
(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
18 Responses
Very very well said. With all these outlandish claims being thrown around and I don’t put it past the dems but they need to show evidence or it has no credibility
this is not at all going after he is asking a legitimate question BUT as she said many times it is dangerous to say certain things in an ongoing investigation peoples lives are at stake
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/sidney-powell-fires-back-tucker-carlson-was-insulting-demanding-and-rude
Sidney powell responded to Carlson
If the Democrats “flipped” votes, why couldn’t they arrange to flip votes for the House and Senate?
Tucker got read the riot act from his corporate masters at FOX.
If you think this is bad, Read the comments from Jodi Ernst (R-Iowa) with respect to Powell, who actually makes Crazy Rudy look mainstream. Aside, from claiming that Martians were part of the Soros, Venezuelan, DNC etc. conspiracy (that also involved at least 10 Republican state AGs or election officials) she is truly part of the “Roger Stone yenavelt”.
Why Tucker is not asking why Dominion Voting Systems refuses to testify today before House Committee in Pennsylvania? Do they have something to hide, Tucker?
Since when do we give evidence to the media before the court??
Once each case is filed, all the evidence (other than redacted info) goes public as they demonstrated at the press conference.
The Trump cult will turn on anyone who challenges anything the Dear Leader claims.
The Venezuela claim is a really interesting bit of hypocrisy. The person with the Chavez connection is actually Giuliani, whose law firm lobbied for a Chavez-controlled oil company for years. But as far as the Trump cult is concerned, Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
The Trump team owes its cases to the courts, not to high and mighty TV hosts.
Tucker, here is the evidence:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MA8a2g6tTp0
Hear Sidney Powell on fox business this morning, defending herself. https://mobile.twitter.com/CarolinaOpinion/status/1329770451145519104?s=09
Once or twice a year Tucker Carlson is honest about something. Probably a requirement so when everything else he lies about is challenged he can point to the one time he spoke the truth as proof that he cares about the truth.
Here is another proof of the FRAUD:
No way this senile demented rapist would win any votes:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1329535859109081089
Tucker is a very logical person. Powell’s claimes make no sense nor can she provide proof. It’s remnisant to the claims of the Democrats that Trump was voted in with the help of Russians. It’s stupid to peddle such a theory. I do believe that there was massive voter fraud but it cannot be proven at this point. I think thwe Republicans in the Senate should pass laws for only on-site voting and voters need to show ID, otherwise fraud WILL happen. At this point in time, however, it is too late in the game to to prove that it voter fraud actually happened on a massive scale.
Tucker Carlson is a journalist. He’s very good at his job. He mostly agrees with Trump but has occasional disagreements. This should not be a big deal. Perhaps he’s being honest?
Many Trump voters have a clear-cut test for evaluating the truth of any statement about Trump: If it’s pro-Trump, it’s true; if it is not pro-Trump, it is false.
> yaakov doe
> If the Democrats “flipped” votes, why couldn’t they arrange to flip votes for the House and Senate?
Who says they did NOT flip votes for House and Senate? All that happened is what happened with Trump. The magnitude of legitimate voter turnout for Trump caught the Democrats by surprise and the Democrats went into emergency over-drive and had to concentrate their efforts on the BIG prize in a really big rush. They shutdown counting on the very first night (unheard of!) and had very little time to stuff the ballot box and couldn’t take the time to fill in every box.
Further, every flip adds to the statistical problems the votes will face. It also adds to the number of different lawsuits to be brought by different candidates. And seeing as the legislature of most of these swing states is already Republican (governor and elections board and major judges being Democrats) too much suspicious vote flipping could lead the Republican legislature to start its own investigation, in particular when their own seats are on the line.