So, I was watching a bit of Viva Frei last night, and Robert Barnes basically came to that conclusion, and this comes from his argument.
If I can reduce his argument down a bit to an easily readable form, it appears to Barnes that Powell may have been the target/victim of a disinformation campaign directed against her and her staff. Instead of focusing her limited time and resources on smaller tangible issues that would get her successes in court, she's fallen down a rabbit hole of looking into who has financial relationships with whom, claiming that the Governor is actually anti-Trump due to his connections, claiming that California may have been won by Trump, claiming that Dominion swung not thousands, or even hundreds of thousands, but many millions of votes. Fundamentally, a bunch of stuff that turns into a gish gallop that Barnes thinks doesn't work in court generally, and is likely to damage the case. It's also why she seems to have been pulled back a bit by the Trump team.
Barnes argues that what the establishment tends to do, particularly the intel agencies, is bombard people with disinformation campaigns to distract them from the primary direction of investigation. This is typically because they can't actually stop the leaking of information, or because the information has already been lost and they want to re-direct investigations away from successful strategies. He cites disinformation campaigns used in relationship to Snowden.
I tend to agree with his assessment in this, from two perspectives. One: how normies react badly to lesser known information with conspiracy thinking, and two: how disinformation campaigns were used against "UFOlogists".
One: most normies and boomers are unaware of the level of corruption and black-ops level activities that the government engages in around the world. They are not aware of cyber-attack operations. They are not aware of assassinations. They are not aware that we negotiate with terrorists. They are not aware that we absolutely rig elections. They don't even really know that Radio Free Europe is literally an American propaganda outlet funded through congress. When they start to see some of this, without really understanding how it really works, they tend to resort to conspiracy-level thinking. They think that the government, because it has these programs, must have near unlimited power and ability, brainwashing millions. As Powell herself said, "It's like drinking from a fire-hose". They don't remember that most of the MK-Ultra experiments didn't work. That the military rejected the Gay Bomb project multiple times because it was ridiculous. That when the CIA used cat-bombs, they got run over by cars. That despite desperate efforts for over a decade, the intelligence agencies repeatedly failed to assassinate Fidel Castro, Saddam Hussein, and Muammar Qaddafi. Yes, they do weird shit, not it has a failure rate, and no not everything is true. Yes, we landed on the moon. Yes, the 9/11 highjackers did crash planes into the twin towers. Yes, JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald. Yes, there were WMD's in Iraq... we sold it to them. You don't need a grand conspiracy, when you can just exploit an opportunity. The Gulf Of Tonkin incident didn't need fake Vietnamese boats and soldiers, just an unclear radar image and an excuse. While I'm sure that Powell was being spoon-fed some valid information, I think she was being spoon-fed information that someone knew would distract her from the important legal arguments. I think the "Kraken" is a ruse.
Two: One of our military intelligence agencies used a similar disinformation strategy to such an absurd degree that their target within the UFO-research community committed suicide. I've long maintained that I believe the UFO investigative community is being actively monitored by military intelligence, because a bunch of civilians with excellent cameras keep sneaking up to the outskirts of secret US military research bases (and in one incident a bio/chem-weapon factory) and taking pictures of their shit. They probably don't like that, and want to make sure that nothing important gets out. I can't remember the man's name, but basically, he had been researching UFO's for years and he got pictures of something very interesting that he though was a UFO. According to statements he made to family, friends, and other hobbyists, someone from the military actually contacted him about the picture. They basically sold him on a giant story: aliens were real, but this wasn't an alien spacecraft. It was actually a small remote controlled spy plane that the military had developed using alien technology. According to the researcher, Men-In-Black style military personnel actually met with him, and then flew him out by helicopter to an actual crash site, where there was a "real" alien probe crash. They basically 'recruited' him to report on all the other crashes and sightings that he found so they could let him know whether it was their secret military aircraft, or possible alien activity that could be a sign of something, maybe the aliens were going to invade or reveal themselves!
If you know anything about aliens, science, physics, or intel agencies, you can probably guess that the dude was basically be recruited by a clever sales pitch to give information to the intel agencies, so that they would be aware of what pictures were being shared of what equipment. They created an informant. Now, to make a long story short, the disinfo campaign started to go completely off the rails. The dude spiraled very badly hurling himself into investigating alien phenomenon and sightings. He seemed to actually develop a genuine mental illness (which can absolutely be related to really rabid paranoid conspiracy thinking). He said he was getting calls from strange people in the middle of the night. IIRC, he did start talking about bizarre shit like voices in his head, alien shape shifters, and all sorts of extravagant stuff. Some people in the UFO community think that the Disinfo Campaign killed him. I suspect that the DIA probably recruited someone who already had a mental illness, and then didn't know what to do once he started showing signs that he was genuinely sick, so they kicked him to the curb and let him spiral so they didn't get in trouble.
I feel like something similar might have happened to Sidney Powell. Someone didn't like the work they were doing, so instead of trying to censor everything, they flooded her with a bit of good, but relatively unprovable information, that starts to involve a patently useless narrative like a scheme to change votes in Germany and that Trump won in California. I think it's absolutely clear we are in the middle of an information war, and Trump's enemy's in the establishment are open to harassing lawyers and intimidating witnesses. I don't think it would be crazy to think that someone clever tried spoon feeding Trump attorneys disinformation to throw them off, considering how time sensitive this the latter stages of this campaign are. It doesn't even have to be the intel agencies, it could easily be Dominion themselves, or just mid level political activists.
Or what if she actually has something worth investigating and bringing to light?
I saw what Barnes Law said but I am willing to wait a bit and give Sidney Powell the opportunity to present what she has found.
Trump's team is now separate from her so they will be tackling election fraud via the constitutional issues standpoint.
Sidney is attacking this through the Dominion angle.
There is a lot of sketchy shit about Dominion that it would not be far-fetched if some of Sidney's claims actually were able to be supported with pieces of hard evidence.
I think too many people like you are quick to craft your own narratives without even considering that maybe Powell actually has some of what she claims to have.
The people mainly discrediting Powell are people I personally don't trust at all like controlled opposition Tucker Carlson and emotionally schizophrenic Mike Cernovich.
Trump's team will be presenting their cases while Sidney presents her case.
Let's wait before you start ridiculing or pitying Sidney Powell.
It's my understanding that Sidney was never a part of the Trump team and she's an outsider who's considered the "criminal lawyer". All of her cases are for criminal court. Lin Wood is a constitutional lawyer and Rudy was one of the men who brought down the mob. Those 2 are focused on constitutional cases with the end goal of making it to SCOTUS. Between the 3 of them they've dropped a lot of bread crumbs so I'm waiting patiently to see if they follow through. I'm also curious about what the kraken is because it's apparently already been released.
For those of you who never looked it up blackboxvoting.org has been arguing about insecure elections since 2003. Regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum there's no reason a 3rd party should be counting our votes and there's no reason the chain of custody should of been so insecure. For those of you who don't remember - Philly voting software stolen 10-01-2020.
Now, hang on, I'm not ridiculing her. If anything, I think she's probably being spoon-fed some good information by a genuine source that's trying to deceive her. That's some 3-D level shit. It means she probably does have some good evidence that was provided to her by a malicious source that intends to fuck her up down the road. I'm not so convinced about her claims about Germany. I don't see Tucker as controlled opposition, though you might be right on Mike.
I can't remember exactly, but she had some serious claims regarding Flynn, and at least some of that turned out to be true. The current situation is a mess, and is proving to be nigh impossible for me to follow, so I might be misremembering.
She made some very outrageous sounding claims in the Flynn case and she actually was able to back it up with evidence.
Based solely on her proven record, I am willing to wait a bit and see if she can produce the evidence to back up her recent extraordinary claims.
Eh, I mean she wasn't an official part of Trump's legal team from the start, and if she does have to bring a case implicating Republicans in massive digital election fraud then it's better for her to have no official connection to Trump. The things she's saying aren't being submitted as evidence in any of the existing cases, so at worst she's damaging to public opinion (which does matter, but not legally). But we'll see if she can back up her claims in the end.
I think it's at least a feasible explanation. She's going down the road of what is an actual conspiracy theory with a lot of connections and complication. It's certainly deep enough that suspecting her being played with false information is not crazy. When I say "conspiracy theory," bear in mind that term doesn't necessarily mean something is wild, outlandish, and false. A theory just means something is currently unproven, not that it can't be proven.
I do think a bit of their disconnection with Powell is for the court of public opinion. They don't want to look too crazy to normal people for the purposes of trying to keep Trump in the White House. I'm losing hope it's actually going to work though, as I just don't see enough of a smoking gun to convince me the courts will take drastic enough action knowing the consequences.
I hope Powell does have something, and we will see. I have no problem letting the situation play out however the outcome goes. It's a total upside play to me, she gets hard evidence and we overturn a huge conspiracy ring of election fraud. She doesn't, and well we're exactly where we are today. She's putting her credibility and career on the line for it, not me.
My claim is worse than that. I'm suspecting that she's being played with some true information, so that she's digging up irrelevant information. You don't have to lie. You give the target good information that is irrelevant and builds a false narrative from true facts. It's a much more difficult problem to address if you're not ready for it.
I'm not worried about the evidence. I'm more worried about the courts. In the History of the US. The Supreme Court has routinely been placed at the center of historical turning points with massive impacts.
I'd say that the vast majority of the time, they make bad decisions. I'd say that the simple majority of the time, they make the worst possible decision.
SCOTUS is almost directly responsible for causing the Civil War, even being given multiple opportunities to walk it back. Each time, they thought they were being given a chance to "solve" the issue, and it caused nothing but disaster. If SCOTUS made a ruling declaring that no currently registered Republican was fit to hold political office, and therefore the states should should be dissolved, and all political power should go through the House Majority Leader, I wouldn't even be all that surprised.
These are the people who invented the Tri-mester system, declared that blacks (even those who owned property or were citizens) just simply couldn't have rights, invented gun control with a proto-fascist argument, rationalized FDR's mass incarceration program, legitimized racial governance along with "separate but equal" as a concept, and also validated for decades the criminalization of Gold and Silver.
The level of retardation that SCOTUS is capable of is nearly unfathomable. These people really could start a Civil War... because they did.
The theory of feeding true information makes a ton of sense. A bit of a play on the concept of hiding in plain sight--let you see me, but in the way I want you to see. Most liars are usually caught because they can't keep their fake story straight, right? So don't have a fake story just control the release of truth.
I'd totally agree I'm worried about the courts more than anything. I don't really trust them to do anything but screw things up. When I speak of evidence I am really thinking about how there would have to be a piece of really obviously irrefutable evidence to sway it. A piece of evidence that, in reality, doesn't exist.
I've been saying since at least early September that there isn't really a good outcome to the election. There's a shitty one and a somewhat less shitty one. The only good outcome I had was a massive conservative landslide to let everyone know the "Court of Twitter" is not the presiding court of the land. That outcome is no more than a ridiculous pipe dream. Trump getting in by a tiny margin (or perhaps by whatever is cooked up by January) I would say is better, but it's not some miracle that's going to end all the world's problems. It's only going to serve to continue the cycle of what we've had year-to-date for longer. For context though, I've been a bit of an America is doomed and it's just a matter of time now since at least 2014 or 15. So, it might just be my pessimism kicking in.
No, Sidney Powell is what happens when you give a Qtard a law degree.
It's pretty much all down to Rudy Giuliani now.
You haven't seen any of the evidence she claims to have just like I haven't.
What if Sidney Powell actually has some hard evidence?
Trump's team is obviously separated from her.
Let's wait to see if she has the evidence to back up her claims.
If she doesn't she has destroyed her own career and I will be right there with you in terms of criticizing her.
Till then, chill and wait.
Asking TheImpossible to given a woman the benefit of the doubt is, well, asking the impossible.
This is the correct answer.
That's not actually why. It's because everything she says she gets from Twitter Qtards.
That's not why though. Everything she says is from idiots with WWG1WGA in their name.
We're literally putting our human rights on the line for this. There's no time to misplace trust.
I don't even trust Rudy, because he was involved in Bannon's dick pic extravaganza, but he's the only person who seems to have a real case.