YouTube shuts down Leftist by Accident!

I also agree with you. Themselves being censored opens their eyes. Here’s what Sidney actually said. On top of that, she reiterated her faith in the evidence…

She absolutely did NOT say that only unreasonable people would believe her claims about the fraud. That is a lie. She and her attorneys made the legal distinction between her expressing her opinion based on the evidence and absolute fact. They said that reasonable people would realize that the case is still being decided and would form their own opinions based on the evidence from Sidney and other sources as many millions of Americans have. Here it it directly from the filing…

***Such characterizations of the allegedly defamatory statements further
support Defendants’ position that reasonable people would not accept such statements as fact but
view them only as claims that await testing by the courts through the adversary process.***

Far from the FAKE NEWS propagandists in the liberal MSM who LIE and claim that Sidney Powell’s legal defense can be summed up by saying “reasonable people” wouldn’t believe her election fraud claims. A lot of the “journalists” went so far as to say she admitted lying, which is exactly what THEY were doing to the American people…again.

Sidney Powell believes in her case, which she reiterated when responding to the fake news lies.

People need to leave the fake news cult. It’s hilarious that they criticize Trump supporters, who actually do their research, for being members of a cult and swallowing information without question. Like everything else, the leftists accuse everyone else of what they do. It’s an old propaganda tactic used by Hitler and many other leftists.

Carry on!

=============

“She and others appeared at a rally called “Stop the Steal,” which the Complaint identifies as
a “Georgia political rally.” Id. at ¶ 1. She claimed that she had evidence that the election result was
the “greatest crime of the century if not the life of the world.” Id. at ¶ 181(bb).11
Reasonable people understand that the “language of the political arena, like the language
used in labor disputes … is often vituperative, abusive and inexact.” Watts v. United States, 394
U.S. 705, 708 (1969). It is likewise a “well recognized principle that political statements are
inherently prone to exaggeration and hyperbole.” Planned Parenthood of Columbia/Willamette,
Inc. v. Am. Coal. of Life Activists, 244 F.3d 1007, 1009 (9th Cir. 2001). Given the highly charged
and political context of the statements, it is clear that Powell was describing the facts on which she
based the lawsuits she filed in support of President Trump. Indeed, Plaintiffs themselves
characterize the statements at issue as “wild accusations” and “outlandish claims.” Id. at ¶¶ 2, 60,
97, 111. They are repeatedly labelled “inherently improbable” and even “impossible.” Id. at ¶¶
110, 111, 114, 116 and 185. ***Such characterizations of the allegedly defamatory statements further
support Defendants’ position that reasonable people would not accept such statements as fact but
view them only as claims that await testing by the courts through the adversary process.***”

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20520809-sidney-powell-court-filing