Sidney Powell = Queen on the chess board with the art of war combo!
Sidney Powell has stated not to interpret her quietness for inaction and now the proof is in the headlines. As Sidney plays her Art of War Game in cunning style, the Dominion operatives are at a check mate!
Dominion was hoping for a win, a stale mate at worse but now the defining moment of show us what you got is now set before them. How? While the Dominion strategy was to accuse the accuser, and doing this by seeking a defamation lawsuit at the Attorney representing America’s laws and constitution for ‘WE THE PEOPLE’, i.e. Sidney Powell (and others) in an effort to hide their participation in the teasonous election fraud. Sidney turned their strategy upside down by moving to dismiss the case. Dominion had charged Powell with making “wild accusations” and “outlandish claims” about their company, thereby, defaming them. These same claims could only be verified using data from Dominion via a pre-trial discovery process and argued in court, something Dominion definitely does not want to do.
So, Sidney makes a motion to dismiss or change venue which could affirm legal protection for private citizens against entities that have been considered or labeled as “public figures” under N.Y. Times Co. These entities are different from government officials, such as politicians, who have gotten a free pass from having to guarantee the truth of their actual assertions. If politicians could defend against false accusations against the press, after what they pulled over the last four years, they would almost assuredly all be bankrupt. For when public figures engage in the deprivation of constitutionally protected rights of private citizens, Americans can be awarded monetary damages.
Powell’s legal arguments are sound. A proper trial would shed light on any doubt to the election fraud questions surrounding the election. Her strategy is bringing this festering sore to a head. Her motion to dismiss argues that Dominion is at minimum a “limited-purpose public figure” and these types of public figures are found in cases where the defamatory statements involve a matter of public concern and whether the plaintiff’s participation invites scrutiny. Where Powell’s statements involve the single most important election in the US, which is the Presidential election and Dominion states it operates in nearly 300 state and local elections, and manage equipment that services over 40% of U.S. voters (almost 62 million), such standards apply.
Limited purpose public figures can defend against defaming statements but must prove the statement was made with actual malice, can be proved “true or false,” and that people accepted the statements as fact, in light of the phrasing, context, and circumstances. Statements of fact and opinions based on statistical analysis are not the same.
Dominion claims that Sidney Powell’s statements cannot be regarded by a reasonable person as truthful. This seems to be a counterproductive claim to Dominion’s cause, as it holds such answers in its software’s data—or should. All companies keep records.
So now Dominion has to prove that Sidney’s statements were motivated by actual malice, proven by clear and convincing evidence. This is a lot harder to prove than the typical civil standard of having a preponderance of the evidence. That is, Dominion must show Sidney Powell knew her claims were false—and peddled them anyway. Which she did nothing of the sort. Sidney has thousands of pages of evidence and expert testimony. The evidence is not only backed by private experts, it’s backed by the federal government and many state governments — from both sides of the aisle.
So far Dominion has failed to state the proper type of harm necessary for relief to be granted on defamation. In fact, Dominion’s allegations are missing the legally proper information, statements, or evidence required to succeed on its merits. That means they are asking the federal judge to punish Ms. Powell and her companies simply because Dominion wants that outcome. This is like someone making up a lie to get someone in trouble which seems to be a new method of the left, but not a standard of acceptable practice in a court of law. Just in congress which plays by their own Pelosi set of rules. We still have constitutional rights.
SCOTUS has held that political speech is “entitled the fullest possible measure of constitutional protection.” Members of City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent. Dominion, to the outside observer, by seeking such high monetary damages, seems to be extorting silence through intimidation of the court system. This should not be tolerated.
D.C. Circuit agreed with Ms. Powell this past week and noted, “Our court… has made clear that evidence of ill will is insufficient by itself to support a finding of actual malice.” With the mountains of evidence supplied by Ms. Powell, it is clear her claims are not the ones that may seem to contain malice.
So now it is clear that opinions backed by evidence cannot be found to have malice and the attacks against Powell for her motion are unfounded and based upon a complete disregard and appreciation for the argument in her filing.
Dominion is pretty much claiming the global audience addressed by Ms. Powell is incapable of looking at the evidence themselves and formulating their own opinions. Talk about a skewed and outrageous statement! The only way for Dominion to succeed is to release their data to prove that Powell’s evidence and other experts are wrong—but even if they could prove that, still no defaming occurred. People debate statistics all the time in public. Sidney Powell is arguing that she formed opinions based on the data, expert testimony, and evidence she was presented with.
Dominion’s case against Sidney and others is in Colorado. Unless federal law preempts, stronger state laws are ones that can apply. In this case, because Colorado is making the claims, Colorado’s law applies, even in Texas. Colorado’s Supreme Court and Constitution have stronger and more vibrant First Amendment protections and case precedents than even the United States Constitution and Supreme Court. The forum, which is crucial in jury selection for trials, is in freedom-loving Texas. So in this suit…Powell can definitely claim ‘CHECK MATE’. Now let’s get on with proving how they were hired to complete the fraud!
Pray for Sidney as she continues to blaze through the biggest voter fraud mess in our history.