Sidney Powell's defamtion case is the perfect opportunity for Powell to do what the Right has been clamoring to do, which even included disrupting the functions of government during January 6th insurrection:
Present their case that the election was stolen. 1/
One of the absolute defenses available to defendant's in defamation cases?
The truth.
So not only would Powell's defamation case provide an opportunity to present the evidence the Right not only claims to have about election fraud, but also claim the courts wouldn't hear,....2/
....but the defamation trial would also provide Powell with the most definitive and efficient defense for winning her case.
But instead, she's invoking a more subjective/less certain "reasonable man" defense.
Why would Powell fail to take advantage of that opportunity? 3/
Because, as @StuartStevens so comprehensively dissected:
"It Was All A Lie"....
.....and desperately claiming/pleading that no "reasonable person" would believe the gaslighting disinformation that she poisoned the country with is the only option she has. 4/
It's interesting to note that while Powell claims that no reasonable person would believe the gaslighting disinformation she spread, one of her defenses is that "SHE believed the allegations then and she believes them now".
And by doing so, Powell self-owned w/that admission. 5/
....who fixes elections (Putin "won" his 2024 election with 88% of the vote) and/or murders political opposition......
.....allegedly accepts NATO-like, Article 5 security protections for Ukraine....
....and promises to pass laws that will prohibit Russia from "violating any European country's sovereignty".....
....in exchange for Ukrainian territory that it acquired by committing war crimes, mass murder, mass rape, mass torture, mass child kidnapping, and attempted genocide?
Remember, Putin invaded Ukraine in violation of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum where Ukraine agreed to give up nuclear weapons in exchange for security agreement from US, UK........AND RUSSIA.
1/
So.....now the world is expected to believe that:
1. Putin will be satisfied with Trump's appeasement/concession of Ukrainian territory (Reminder: Narcissism/Psychopathy is insatiable)
2. Putin.....a psychopath who has no respect for human life.....let alone the rule of law......will honor any "law" passed by Russia that restrains his insatiable appetite.
3. Putin will honor/respect any international agreement when he already violated the international agreement that promised Ukraine security for giving up nuclear weapons.
4. A U.S.-led security agreement that promises security for Ukraine at the potential expense of U.S. treasure...and maybe blood (boots on the ground).....can be trusted when the leader of the U.S. is a morally bankrupt sociopathic narcissist who lies like he breathes, and is incapable of being trusted to put the interests of others (Ukraine) ahead of his own......even if he "promises" to do so.
2/
Remember, Trump generally only cares about the "appearance" of something.....he doesn't care about the actual execution/implementation.
That will likely be the case here, especially if he's already won the Nobel Peace Prize:
1. Yes, it's enraging watching the same people (sheep) who cheered on the Iraq war 20 years ago.......
......morph into "America First", anti-"nation building", anti-"forever war" MAGAs who believed Trump when he said Biden/Kamala/Dems were leading the U.S.(Ukraine) into World War III, or would do so in the future......
.....and then suddenly morph back into NeoCons as they sycophantically cheer on a "War Time President".
1/
2.
Tribalism is the dominant force in America (and, by extension....in the world because it shapes our foreign policy).
@jordanbpeterson: Narcissists/psychopaths are taking over the “fringe” Right.
Apparently Peterson and @joerogan have issues with the “fringe” narcissists/sociopaths who are undermining the sociopathic/narcissist who they support: Trump.
The thread analyzed the desensitization process that occurs when there is legal/psychological "precedent" of Trump committing an unconstitutional action.