I like Sidney

Tucker Carlson has issued an "update" after a segment on his Fox News show about voter fraud allegations drew backlash.

On Thursday night, Carlson delivered a monologue in which he discussed President Donald Trump's attorney Sidney Powell and her claims that rigged voting software switched millions of votes from Trump to Joe Biden in the 2020 election.

According to Carlson, Powell refused to send him evidence supporting her claims, despite multiple requests from "Tucker Carlson Tonight."

"When we kept pressing, she got angry and told us to stop contacting her," Carlson said in the Thursday segment. "When we checked with others around the Trump campaign, people in positions of authority, they told us Powell has never given them any evidence either, nor did she provide any today at the press conference."
 
She hasn't shown any evidence to anyone, Inc the rest of the trump campaign.

Also she hasn't presented any evidence in court during the over 30 cases that have been thrown out of court.

In fact trump campaign lawyers have admitted in court they have no evidence, which is why the cases have been dismissed.
 
BarrowFox said:
She hasn't shown any evidence to anyone, Inc the rest of the trump campaign.

Also she hasn't presented any evidence in court during the over 30 cases that have been thrown out of court.

In fact trump campaign lawyers have admitted in court they have no evidence, which is why the cases have been dismissed.
Click to expand...
It never ceases to amaze me how people on here just KNOW everything about what is going on between people they have no access to. Even though they have zero idea of what is really going on behind the scenes. But here we go, we got someone who can tell you exactly what is going on. Holed up in Barrow. :D
 
Last edited:
RubberDoug said:
It never ceases to amaze me how people on here just KNOW everything about what is going on between people they have no access to and even though they have zero idea of what is really going on behind the scenes.
Click to expand...
Hey,

Where did I claim to know everything that is going on?

I simply repeated some information, much like the op.

If you'd like to post something to further the discussion then crack on. Or maybe you can post something you've gleaned that sets out an alternative version of events.

Or you could continue with a thin veiled attack, your choice.

But when Tucker Carlson who is the loudest of trump supporters is calling you out as a liar just maybe she's playing to an audience of one.
 
I'll make it simple for you.
Some have said, 'she hasn't shown any evidence to anyone, Inc the rest of the trump campaign.'
She is not on record for saying that. So for now, that is what is called 'speculation'.
I know this is tough for you, because this isn't a veiled attack, it's someone being honest.
You're repeating speculation, reformulating it as your opinion, but telling us it is a fact.
Go dig for yourself.
Tucker hasn't said she has no evidence.
But he does say that she hasn't shared it with him.
Why would she? It's going to court.
She's on record as saying that she didn't like the way Tucker communicated to her, and so refused to deal with him.
He's on record for saying that he hopes that she will produce the evidence within the next two weeks when it goes to court.

She may be a liar. Tucker never called her one, yet you say he did. Lies, huh? She may not have shared any evidence, as 'some' have said.
But Barrow mi lad, you don't effing know yet, do you?
 
There is a suggestion that Thursdays press conference and the fall out from it over the last couple of days, is to indicate to the Democrats and the media the depth of the information and the evidence that Trumps people have on this.

So far they have barely touched on the computer evidence, allegedly it shows details of massive fraud across most if not all states. So much so that Trump not only won the election, but did so quite comfortably.

Going to be interesting how this plays out.
 
If it's true, I dread to think of the fall out. Makes a mockery of the Yanks bombing democracy and freedom into other nations.
But I always viewed the US as nothing more than a backward banana republic anyway.
 
RubberDoug said:
I'll make it simple for you.
Some have said, 'she hasn't shown any evidence to anyone, Inc the rest of the trump campaign.'
She is not on record for saying that. So for now, that is what is called 'speculation'.
I know this is tough for you, because this isn't a veiled attack, it's someone being honest.
You're repeating speculation, reformulating it as your opinion, but telling us it is a fact.
Go dig for yourself.
Tucker hasn't said she has no evidence.
But he does say that she hasn't shared it with him.
Why would she? It's going to court.
She's on record as saying that she didn't like the way Tucker communicated to her, and so refused to deal with him.
He's on record for saying that he hopes that she will produce the evidence within the next two weeks when it goes to court.

She may be a liar. Tucker never called her one, yet you say he did. Lies, huh? She may not have shared any evidence, as 'some' have said.
But Barrow mi lad, you don't effing know yet, do you?
Click to expand...
RubberDoug said:
I'll make it simple for you.
Some have said, 'she hasn't shown any evidence to anyone, Inc the rest of the trump campaign.'
She is not on record for saying that. So for now, that is what is called 'speculation'.
I know this is tough for you, because this isn't a veiled attack, it's someone being honest.
You're repeating speculation, reformulating it as your opinion, but telling us it is a fact.
Go dig for yourself.
Tucker hasn't said she has no evidence.
But he does say that she hasn't shared it with him.
Why would she? It's going to court.
She's on record as saying that she didn't like the way Tucker communicated to her, and so refused to deal with him.
He's on record for saying that he hopes that she will produce the evidence within the next two weeks when it goes to court.

She may be a liar. Tucker never called her one, yet you say he did. Lies, huh? She may not have shared any evidence, as 'some' have said.
But Barrow mi lad, you don't effing know yet, do you?
Click to expand...

I simply repeated what had been said by Tucker, now I did say that Tucker had called out a lie, and the truth is he stopped short of calling her a liar, just. he did though claim that Sidney has chosen not to share her information with anyone.

It is a fact that in court rudy did say that they were not claiming election fraud.

It's also a fact that over 30 cases brought forward by the trump campaign have been dismissed.

It is also a fact that to date no evidence for massive electoral fraud has been shown.

So I do know some stuff, but best to shift the focus away from that laddie.


I'd be grateful if you could let us know when this case is coming to court, then we can all read about the claims and see the evidence.
 
Last edited:
BarrowFox said:
I simply repeated what had been said by Tucker, now I did say that Tucker had called out a lie, and the truth is he stopped short of calling her a liar, just. he did though claim that Sidney has chosen not to share her information with anyone.

It is a fact that in court rudy did say that they were not claiming election fraud.

It's also a fact that over 30 cases brought forward by the trump campaign have been dismissed.

It is also a fact that to date no evidence for massive electoral fraud has been shown.

So I do know some stuff, but best to shift the focus away from that laddie.


I'd be grateful if you could let us know when this case is coming to court, then we can all read about the claims and see the evidence.
Click to expand...
BarrowFox it’s hard to tell if you are a liar or just sloppy.

You say “I simply repeated what had been said by Tucker.”.

But you didn’t, as you now have to admit. “I did say that Tucker had called out a lie, and the truth is he stopped short of calling her a liar.” Yes, Barrow. He didn't do what you said he did.

But what else?

Here’s what you also said to JG.

“She hasn't shown any evidence to anyone, Inc the rest of the trump campaign.”

Very clear, very certain.

But is that what Tucker said? No. He said that he’d contacted ’some’ people. He never said anything about contacting ’the rest of the Trump campaign.’ So you’ve lied again, or you’ve been very sloppy.

And look at your statement, offered to us as a certainty. (A fact?)

So I will repeat. Even if Tucker said this or that, (hearsay), how could you, not being involved with this small community, at the moment, KNOW what really has transpired?

I said earlier that you're repeating speculation, reformulating it as your opinion, but telling us it is a fact.

It’s worse than that. You're misquoting people, (possibly lying), repeating speculation, reformulating it as your opinion, but telling us it is a fact.

Most of us on here are sceptical. We’ll all agree that she could be lying. I don’t know if the truth will come out. But one thing is for certain, none of us should accept, blindly, the words of others. None of us know for certain, but some of us do try to tell the truth.
 
RubberDoug said:
BarrowFox it’s hard to tell if you are a liar or just sloppy.

You say “I simply repeated what had been said by Tucker.”.

But you didn’t, as you now have to admit. “I did say that Tucker had called out a lie, and the truth is he stopped short of calling her a liar.” Yes, Barrow. He didn't do what you said he did.

But what else?

Here’s what you also said to JG.

“She hasn't shown any evidence to anyone, Inc the rest of the trump campaign.”

Very clear, very certain.

But is that what Tucker said? No. He said that he’d contacted ’some’ people. He never said anything about contacting ’the rest of the Trump campaign.’ So you’ve lied again, or you’ve been very sloppy.

And look at your statement, offered to us as a certainty. (A fact?)

So I will repeat. Even if Tucker said this or that, (hearsay), how could you, not being involved with this small community, at the moment, KNOW what really has transpired?

I said earlier that you're repeating speculation, reformulating it as your opinion, but telling us it is a fact.

It’s worse than that. You're misquoting people, (possibly lying), repeating speculation, reformulating it as your opinion, but telling us it is a fact.

Most of us on here are sceptical. We’ll all agree that she could be lying. I don’t know if the truth will come out. But one thing is for certain, none of us should accept, blindly, the words of others. None of us know for certain, but some of us do try to tell the truth.
Click to expand...
You do know it's a spoof account right
 
RubberDoug said:
It never ceases to amaze me how people on here just KNOW everything about what is going on between people they have no access to. Even though they have zero idea of what is really going on behind the scenes. But here we go, we got someone who can tell you exactly what is going on. Holed up in Barrow. :D
Click to expand...
So how do you know everything about people on here and whether or not they know what goes on between people they have no access to, and whether they actually have zero idea of what is really going on? Maybe you are just speculating. Like they are.
 
Another hilarious thread.
Are you kidding Haardaass? It's obvious that most of us here know that we don't know. That's what most of this is about: trying to find the truth. That necessitates speculation.

The only thing Rubber has said emphatically, is the one thing that can't really be denied:

Barrow has not told the truth. That is not speculation, is it? In sympathy with Barrow, he may have got carried away. I catch myself kidding myself, lying to myself, quite often.

But why should anyone, interested in looking for truth, (or simply interested in speculation), invest too much time on people who lie?
 
Quite the pile on here,

some justified, I did add my own spin to Tuckers claims, I would though challenge anyone to watch his monologue and not come to the conclusion that he was calling out Sydney. But hey you live and learn.

If you want to use this as an excuse to avoid engaging in a debate then there's not a lot I can do about that.



Now I originally said this:
She hasn't shown any evidence to anyone, Inc the rest of the trump campaign.

Also she hasn't presented any evidence in court during the over 30 cases that have been thrown out of court.

In fact trump campaign lawyers have admitted in court they have no evidence, which is why the cases have been dismissed.


The first paragraph is incorrect, Should have said Tucker has claimed he has spoken to members of the trump campaign, and they have not seen anything from her.


I would though challenge Rubbers assertion that I was:
repeating speculation, reformulating it as your opinion, but telling us it is a fact.

Well here are tuckers words, verbatim.

Does he call Sydney a liar, no he does though imply he doesn't believe her.

we took Sidney Powell seriously, with no intention of fighting with her. We've always respected her work and 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.

But she never sent us any evidence, despite a lot of polite requests. When we kept pressing, she got angry and told us to stop contacting her. When we checked with others around the Trump campaign, people in positions of authority, they also told us Powell had never given them any evidence to prove anything she claimed at the press conference.

Powell did say that electronic voting is dangerous, and she's right, but she never demonstrated that a single actual vote was moved illegitimately by software from one candidate to another. Not one

Why are we telling you this? We're telling you this because it's true, and in the end, that's all that matters.

The truth is our only hope and our best defense. It's how we're different from them: We care what's true and we know you care, too. Maybe Sidney Powell will come forward soon with details on exactly how this happened and precisely who did it. We are certainly hopeful that she will.
 
BarrowFox said:
Quite the pile on here,

some justified, I did add my own spin to Tuckers claims, I would though challenge anyone to watch his monologue and not come to the conclusion that he was calling out Sydney. But hey you live and learn.

If you want to use this as an excuse to avoid engaging in a debate then there's not a lot I can do about that.



Now I originally said this:
She hasn't shown any evidence to anyone, Inc the rest of the trump campaign.

Also she hasn't presented any evidence in court during the over 30 cases that have been thrown out of court.

In fact trump campaign lawyers have admitted in court they have no evidence, which is why the cases have been dismissed.


The first paragraph is incorrect, Should have said Tucker has claimed he has spoken to members of the trump campaign, and they have not seen anything from her.


I would though challenge Rubbers assertion that I was:
repeating speculation, reformulating it as your opinion, but telling us it is a fact.

Well here are tuckers words, verbatim.

Does he call Sydney a liar, no he does though imply he doesn't believe her.

we took Sidney Powell seriously, with no intention of fighting with her. We've always respected her work and 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.

But she never sent us any evidence, despite a lot of polite requests. When we kept pressing, she got angry and told us to stop contacting her. When we checked with others around the Trump campaign, people in positions of authority, they also told us Powell had never given them any evidence to prove anything she claimed at the press conference.

Powell did say that electronic voting is dangerous, and she's right, but she never demonstrated that a single actual vote was moved illegitimately by software from one candidate to another. Not one

Why are we telling you this? We're telling you this because it's true, and in the end, that's all that matters.

The truth is our only hope and our best defense. It's how we're different from them: We care what's true and we know you care, too. Maybe Sidney Powell will come forward soon with details on exactly how this happened and precisely who did it. We are certainly hopeful that she will.
Click to expand...
A pile on? Really? What two posters?
Avoid engaging in debate?
Not a lot you can do?
Well, irrespective of how you originally may have said something, you've obviously not been telling the truth.

What is there to debate?
The whole thing is up in the air, very fluid, with the key lawyer in the claim saying that she is still compiling evidence and holding it back.
Whether that's true or not, we'll see. But if that is the case, why do you think she'd release it in the cases that have gone to court so far? Not very bright, and logistically/timewise, I'd imagine not possible.

In all honesty though, I can't be arsed to debate.

But I'll leave something that might go somewhere... Surely Dominion should bring a defamation case against her? No?
 
I imagine that you can tell us. Afterall, you seem to know exactly what is going in the team, in each legal case, the communication channels.

Remember, no lying now.
 
RegiRoka said:
I imagine that you can tell us. Afterall, you seem to know exactly what is going in the team, in each legal case, the communication channels.

Remember, no lying now.
Click to expand...
Snarky, nice look

I haven't claimed to know exactly whats going on now have I, so would that be a lie? Perhaps your just speculating.

I have no idea why trump has sacked her, that's why I asked the question
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top