Sidney Powell Drops Bomb On Traitors, After Huge Win

A Texas judge has been asked to discipline former President Donald Trump’s attorney Sidney Powell for ‘filing frivolous lawsuits supporting his false claims of electoral fraud’. Clearly, the left is abusing their positions to target anyone who supported the former President.

Join Our Telegram Chanel Here: Donald Trump News

The disciplinary action is a significant step in what has become a nationwide campaign to punish pro-Trump lawyers who attempted to overturn the November 2020 presidential election result. However, it does not represent the end of the investigation.

The matter will be heard by a Texas state court judge who will determine whether sanctions should be imposed and if so, what those sanctions might be.

In its decision published on Tuesday, the Texas State Bar Commission for Lawyer Discipline said Powell “had no reasonable basis” for suing to overturn Biden’s victories in key battleground states.

“Beginning in or about November of 2020[,] respondent filed multiple federal lawsuits in different jurisdictions (including the District Court of Arizona, the Northern District of Georgia, the Eastern District of Michigan, and the Eastern District of Wisconsin) alleging, inter alia, election fraud has occurred in the national presidential election in 2020,” the lawsuit began.

“Respondent (Powell) had no reasonable basis to believe the lawsuits she filed were not frivolous,” the complaint alleged. The suit cited a federal ethical rule requiring attorneys to exercise due diligence before asserting claims.

According to the Detroit Free Press, “Powell is licensed to practice law in Texas. She led the so-called “Kraken” legal team that filed a lawsuit in Michigan asking a court to order state officials award the state’s Electoral College votes to former President Donald Trump despite his loss to Joe Biden by more than 154,000 votes. The State Bar of Texas zeroed in on this lawsuit in arguing that she violated the state’s rules governing lawyers’ professional conduct, including those prohibiting lawyers from knowingly making false statements of fact or using false evidence.”

In a statement, Powell said that she looked forward to presenting evidence that would clear her name.

“The Texas bar decision was totally expected, but it is an unfortunate and poor decision by the Bar,” Powell commented. “No lawyer could practice law under the rule they would set for me.”

In an attempt to overturn the election result, Powell represented Trump’s campaign. After Powell claimed at a Nov. 19 news conference that electronic voting systems had swapped millions of votes to Biden, his campaign distanced itself from Powell.

Completing this poll entitles you to Conservative Patriots news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Powell filed an election lawsuit in Michigan in August, and a federal judge there dismissed it as frivolous.

“This lawsuit represents a historic and profound abuse of the judicial process,” U.S. District Judge Linda Parker wrote in her decision. She went on to explain that the lawsuit “was never about fraud – it was about undermining the people’s faith in our democracy and debasing the judicial process to do so.”

In response to that decision, Powell and lawyers with whom she worked have appealed, saying the actions were ethical.

The Free Press quoted Powell as saying she wasn’t surprised by the decision to pursue sanctions by the Texas agency. ‘I look forward to presenting our evidence in court. It will likely be the first time any judge in the country has heard testimony from one of our witnesses. It will be eye-opening to the public,’ Powell predicted.

In New York, a state court ruled on Tuesday that Smartmatic could pursue its $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit alleging that Fox News Network, Rudolph Giuliani, and others falsely claimed that the maker of electronic voting systems had helped rig the 2020 U.S. presidential election in favor of Democrat Joe Biden.

New York Supreme Court Justice David Cohen rejected the requests of Rupert Murdoch’s Fox Corporation (FOXA.O), anchor Maria Bartiromo, and former anchor Lou Dobbs for dismissal of Smartmatic’s claims against them.

Moreover, Cohen revealed that Smartmatic could pursue some claims against Giuliani, who worked as an attorney for former Republican President Donald Trump.

The judge dismissed all claims against Sidney Powell and Fox host Jeanine Pirro.

The judge ruled that a supposed misstatement by Pirro was not defamatory and that he did not have jurisdiction over Powell.

In a statement, Howard Kleinhendler, Powell’s lawyer, said that he is “confident that any subsequent litigation by Smartmatic or others will reach the same result.”

Last month, Powell sued Verizon to stop records and data from being disclosed to the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6 violence at the Capitol.

A subpoena was issued in January 2022 by the House Select Committee to Investigations January 6th against several close allies of the former president, including his former attorney Sidney Powell, who is a Texas member of the bar with a Dallas office.

It asked Powell if she had any evidence to support Trump’s claims of election fraud in its letter to her.

Join Our Telegram Chanel Here: Donald Trump News

Court documents state that Powell also maintains that Verizon’s phone records that were subpoenaed in connection with the Jan. 6 investigation shouldn’t be made public due to the attorney-client privilege and a violation of her First Amendment rights.

The attorney for Powell says his client had “no involvement in the events of January 6th, yet the DOJ is seeking records that contain client privileges held by numerous clients.”
In addition, the lawsuit asserts that the subpoena of Verizon’s phone records on Feb. 4 violated the Stored Communications Act, which says an electronic provider “shall not knowingly divulge to any person or entity the contents of a communication while in electronic storage to that service.”

Additionally, it is alleged that the subpoena violates the Telecommunications Act of 1996 by searching for the “contents of a communication while in electronic storage” without the authorization of Powell or the law.

Moreover, Powell believes her First Amendment rights have been violated as the subpoena is too broad and there is no way a “governmental interest could be sufficiently compelling to permit it to delve through every phone call place or received” by Powell over the course of three months.