Sidney Powell says no reasonable person would believe her...

Sidney's argument is simple. Reasonable people believe others are "innocent until proven guilty" in court. So until the claims she made see their day in court and are proven true or false, they can't possibly have any impact on Dominion's business.

Dominion would have to prove that reasonable people don't believe others are "innocent until proven guilty". They can't.

Case closed.

originally posted by: Phage
She seeks dismissal. Rather than going to court and using the discovery process to get evidence from Dominion. Her opportunity to finally present in court all that evidence she's sitting on. She's seeking dismissal of the lawsuit because she was just grandstanding for Trump so it doesn't matter what she said, if she was lying or not. What a surprise.

Will Lindell do the same? Guilani? Probly.

In any case, it seems there are a number of unreasonable people about. People who ate every word.

You aren't grasping the poker-like situation here. Dominion's lawsuit is $1.3B for a reason. They are going "all in" to try and get Sidney to fold before the "flop". In this case, the discovery phase would be like the flop and or "river" that reveals more cards (evidence).

This is a rookie move on Dominion's side. Going "all in" is an intimidation tactic that usually indicates they are bluffing, and or they know the other player has a better hand, and they want to scare the other player away before the rest of the cards are revealed and they lose.

Sidney has to make a decision to call or fold. Calling would allow discovery, but would also put her on the hook for a $1.3B bet.

Folding (seeking dismissal) is the best option for Sidney in this game because Dominion's case is too broad (they have a wild card). Dominion only needs to prove one of her statements is inaccurate. Sidney would have to prove all of her statements are accurate.

Sidney is intelligent enough to know the odds are not in her favor. If any one of the many statements she made was even a little bit exaggerated, even a little bit off, even if the end result of the statement was true, if one little detail in the middle was wrong she could lose the game.

Since most of her statements were simplified and short form for social media format, and you can only put so much detail into a single tweet or post and hold back details. This can leave holes and opportunities for someone to argue their own misinterpretation. This is where they can purposefully misinterpret what Sidney said to create the illusion of a false claim. That is difficult to defend.

Her folding does not mean what she said was grandstanding or a lie ( because that hasn't been proven in court). Nor does it mean Dominion has a better hand in this poker game. It just means Dominion has more "fold equity".