Rush Limbaugh show, 2020.11.20:
RUSH: Steve in Birmingham, Alabama. Great to have you, sir. Hello.
STEVE: Hello, Rush. Mega dittos, mega prayers. … I watched the news conference yesterday. I’ve heard the commentary from you and others, and it seems so blatantly obvious that there was fraud. Why is it so difficult for those on our side to prove it? Why is it so difficult for it to see the light of day? I just… It’s so frustrating.
RUSH: Well, as I understand it, the ultimate proof is going to have to be to the satisfaction of a court within a lawsuit-type circumstance. Therefore, the court of public opinion doesn’t matter. Are you asking, “Why are they not showing everybody at these press conferences the precise evidence they’ve got so that the American people can see it, get outraged and angry, and have all that energy used to assist the effort?”?
STEVE: Not necessarily. I mean, I understand it’s an opening statement, all of that. But when they say that 200%, 300% voted in a district, why is that not in the headlines? I mean, that just seems obvious to me. … Well, no. … I know why it’s not being reported and covered. But if 200% people vote in a district, why is that not obviously fraud?
RUSH: Well, because there’s a whole contingency out there that doesn’t want it to be. They don’t want it to be seen as fraud, known as fraud. Rudy and his bunch, they are saying that. They’re reporting that. They’re talking about the number of registered voters versus the number of people that voted. They’re giving the numbers of the dead who voted in various places. They’re going state by state, in some cases city by city, and they’re giving some evidence, some examples of the stuff that they have found, but they can’t give away everything they’ve got because they’ve got to save it for court.
The ultimate success of this is gonna be in a courtroom somewhere, and so they’ve gotta keep their powder dry when it comes to all that, and that’s why they keep saying it’s going to take time, because they have to amass all the evidence. It’s a challenging thing, I know.
I’m like you. I want to see it. Sidney Powell says the evidence here is so much, it’s like a fire hose. Well, okay, then, ‘Let’s show it to people who don’t believe it and let them deal with it, like people in the media or others who think there’s nothing to see here!’
But I think what they’re telling you is that exactly what you want is the case. They’re trying to tell you they are finding the exact evidence that you want to hear. They’re giving you little bits and pieces and morsels of it.
There were some fireworks between Tucker Carlson of the Fox News Channel and Sidney Powell. Carlson invited her on to explain all this evidence. He invited her to come on the show, gave her the entire hour, and she didn’t accept the invitation because she had her objections. She shot back at Tucker Carlson the morning after he said she “got angry”, and refused to provide evidence on his show for her claims of voting software flipping votes.
“No, I didn’t get angry with the request to provide evidence,” [she said]. “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, but he was very insulting, demanding, and rude, and I told him not to contact me again, in those terms,” Powell concluded.
On his show Friday night, Carlson said that he had made “a lot of requests” for Powell to provide evidence for the Trump campaign’s allegations of widespread voter fraud but was given “not a page” of evidence.
“We took Sidney Powell seriously. We had no intention of fighting with her. We’ve always respected her work. 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’ve given her the whole hour. We would’ve given her the entire week, actually, and listened quietly the whole time at rapt attention. That’s a big story. But she never sent us any evidence, despite a lot of requests — polite requests. Not a page,” Carlson said.
After Powell told Carlson to stop contacting her, he said that his team “checked with others around the Trump campaign…,” who said that “Powell had never given them any evidence either.”
So she is now shooting back at Carlson, after he said she “got angry” and refused to provide evidence on his show for her claims of voting software flipping votes.
So let’s go to the audio sound bites. This is Sidney Powell this morning on the Fox Business Network, Mornings with Maria Bartiromo, who said, “Dominion is calling all of the allegations that you, Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis have made absurd. Your response?”
POWELL: “They created the system in Venezuela for Hugo Chavez to rig the elections and make sure he won. They’ve sold that for that very purpose to other countries. And they brought it to this country for that very purpose, and they’ve used it that way. We’ve got evidence that shows it. We have firsthand testimony of witnesses who saw it happen, know how it was developed, know why it was developed, and saw it work to they’ve its purposes, and many others. And we have irrefutable statistical and mathematical evidence.”
RUSH: Next — this is from this morning — Maria Bartiromo said to Sidney Powell, “Will you be able to prove this evidence that you say you have of this technology flipping votes from Trump to Biden? How will you prove that, Sidney?” Do you have it?”
POWELL: “I’m still getting information through a firehose. We can’t even keep up with the witnesses that are calling in and wanting to give affidavits and provide evidence. So this is a very early in a stage of any case, aside from one of this massive magnitude that, frankly, should have investigated and stopped by our law enforcement community within a decade ago. We shouldn’t be in this position, and here we are, a few — a handful of civil lawyers trying to do the work of a massive government institution in the biggest, worldwide corruption fraud ever exposed.”
BARTIROMO: “You’ll be able to prove that in court in the next two weeks?”
POWELL: “Yes. I fully expect we’ll be able to prove all of it in court within the next two weeks.”
RUSH: Now, Sidney Powell has a point here. But, it is what it is, and she’s making the point that you are, essentially: Where’s the DOJ? Where’s the FBI? Where is the federal government protecting itself? Where is the federal government ensuring that its own institutions are protected and have integrity? Where’s the FBI and the DOJ investigating Dominion? Why are we having to do it?
She’s essentially saying: We’re a handful of civil lawyers — we’re civilian lawyers here. We have a client. Our client is Donald Trump. He’s having the election stolen from him. He won it in a landslide. We’re it. We’re the only people he’s got. We’re trying to do the job that a federal agency would be required to do here. It’s that massive. And that’s what she’s saying. And it’s a good point.
I know where she’s coming from, folks. I know exactly where she’s coming from. She’s frustrated that the people with the equipment and with the size, with the ability, with the manpower to do this aren’t doing it. They’re nowhere to be found. They’re nowhere on the ground.
I know how she feels. You got this massive agency, the FBI, related agencies in the DOJ. They’re happy to do this because their heart is in it. She, Rudy, they’re happy to do it. I don’t know who’s paying ’em. I don’t know what they’re being paid, but they’re happy to do it.
They believe in the Constitution. They believe in protecting the integrity and the dignity of the Constitution and of our electoral system, and if Trump had this thing pulled out from under him, they want it restored.
But they’ve got four or five people here, whatever staff members, four or five people here doing the job that an entire subagency of the FBI would be assigned to here, except it hasn’t been. Why? Can you say Deep State, folks? We’re up against what we’ve always been up against here.
RUSH: Here’s Sidney Powell with Maria Bartiromo this morning on the Fox Business Network.
Question: “How do you respond to Tucker Carlson? Did you get angry with his show because they texted you and asked you to please provide evidence of what you are alleging?”
POWELL: “No, I didn’t get angry with the request to provide evidence. 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 statistical evidence far better than I can. I’m not really a numbers person. But he was very insulting, demanding, and rude, and I told him not to contact me again, in those terms.”
RUSH: Uh-oh. Doesn’t sound good. So last night, this what Tucker said about Sidney Powell:
CARLSON: “What Powell was describing would amount to the single greatest crime in American history. Millions of votes stolen in a 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 have given her the whole hour. We would have given her the entire week, actually, and listened quietly the whole time at rapt attention. That’s a big story. But she never sent us any evidence, despite a lot of requests, polite requests. Not a page. When we kept pressing she got angry and told us to stop contacting her.”