(Photo
by
Drew
Angerer/Getty
Images)
On
its
way
out
the
door,
the
January
6
Select
Committee
published
the
transcript
of
Kraken
attorney
Sidney
Powell’s
May
7
deposition,
and,
friends,
it
does
not
disappoint.
Finally,
we
learn
what
it
takes
for
Rudy
Giuliani
to
declare
someone
“unfit
to
practice
law!”
There’s
a
lot
she’s
hazy
on:
STAFF
COUNSEL:
So
what’s
the
first
thing
you
recall
about
getting
involved
after
the
election?
I
know
I’ve
been
trying
to
sort
of
probe
your
memory
as
best
I
can
about
those
chaotic
days,
but
what
do
you
remember
is
the
first
actions
you
took
in
the
post-election
time
frame?POWELL:
Oh,
boy.
That’s
a
very
hard
one.
I
hadn’t
thought
about
it
that
way
at
all.
It’s
like
asking
for
your
first
memory
of
your
mother.
And
she
doesn’t
remember
how
she
got
hooked
up
with
Rudy
Giuliani
and
Lin
Wood,
or
much
of
anything
else,
really.
But
she’s
not
shy
about
telling
you
how
the
election
was
stolen!
STAFF
COUNSEL:
What’s
your
understanding
of
Hammer
and
Scorecard?POWELL:
That
it’s
essentially
a
government-instigated
program
that
would
allow
for
real-time
monitoring
of
votes
and
the
ability
to
predetermine
the
outcome
of
an
election
or
run
an
algorithm
against
the
votes.STAFF
COUNSEL:
Where
did
you
learn
about
that?POWELL:
General
Mclnerney
has
talked
about
it
a
lot.
I
know
Dennis
Montgomery
has
talked
about
it
a
lot.
And
I
eventually
found
the
patent
that
I
think
probably
covers
Hammer
and
Scorecard
that
was
funded
by
the
Department
of
Defense
back
in,
oh,
roughly
2003
to
2005
time
frame,
and
also
the
patent
for
the
process
to
predetermine
the
result
of
an
election.
Go
on
…
Well,
the
conclusion
that
I
have
come
to
—
again,
I
can’t
tell
you
when
it
first
sort
of
crystallized
—
but
is
that
there
was
an
algorithm
in
the
voting
machines.
It
may
have
been
in
every
machine
across
the
country.
It
may
have
been
in
select
machines
across
the
country.
I
don’t
know.
That
remains
to
be
seen.
But
an
algorithm
essentially
gave
weighted,
for
example,
this
is
not
a
specific,
but,
for
example,
could
weight
a
Biden
vote
at
1.25
and
weight
a
Trump
vote
at
0.75.
And
there
is
a
video
that’s
been
around
for
a
long
time
called
“Fraction
Magic”
that
you
can
find
on
our
website
probably,
at
defendingtherepublic.org,
that
explains
that process,
and
it
goes
way
back.
So
people
have
identified
that
long
before
I
did.
And
then,
on
top
of
that,
I
think
what
happened
election
night
was
–
and
I’ve
said
this
publicly
–
the
turnout
for
Trump
in
person
on
election
day
was
so
great
that
it
broke
the
algorithm
in
those
key
States.
And
this
time
they
had
the
plan
of
the
ground
game
backup
of
the
mail-in
ballots, many
of
which
we
know
from
the
“2000
Mules”
documentary
were
fraudulent
and
were
ballot
box
stuffed
to
cover
for
the
machine
fraud
needed.
And
that’s
why
the
vote
counting
had
to
stop
election
night
in
those
States
and
they
had
to
backfill.
Uhhhhh
…
Oh,
Lord,
she’s
still
going.
STAFF
COUNSEL:
And
did
you
do
that
on
your
own,
or
did
some
expert
or
person
with
some
knowledge
of
election
security
and
so
forth
help
you
form
that
opinion
in
the
early
days
after
the
campaign?POWELL:
I
have
been
digging
into
it
probably
nonstop
with
the
exception
of
sleeping
hours
and
a
few
eating
hours
since
election
night.
And
one
of
the
remarkable
things
I
found
was
the
testimony
of
Clint
Curtis
in
2004
before
the
House
Judiciary
Committee
in
Ohio
about
the
2000
—
I
think
it
was
the
2000
or
the
2004
election.
Curtis
is
a
republican
who
testified
in
front
of
Jerry
Nadler
and
Maxine
Waters
and
whoever
else
was
on
that
special
House
Committee
that
sat
in
special
seating
in
Ohio,
that
he
had
been
hired
by
the
Republican
head
of
the
Senate
I
think,
or
the
House,
in
Florida
to
write
an
algorithm
to
change
votes
for
Bush
in
the
2004
election
in
Florida.And,
you
know,
everybody
listening
to
it
then
was
absolutely
flabbergasted,
but
he
said
he
did
it.
And
the
company
he
worked
for
on
top
of
all
that
had
a
relationship
to
China,
and
had
had
a
Chinese
spy
working
for
it.
So,
you
know,
then
I
look
at
Smartmatic
and
it
goes
back
to
being
founded
in
Venezuela
in
1977
by
three
Venezuelans
that
come
out
of
nowhere,
and
then
all
of
the
sudden
have
a
multimillion
dollar
contact
with
Venezuela
to
literally
rig
elections
in
Venezuela.
They
did
it
for
Chavez.
Oh
stewardess,
I
speak
loon.
She’s
saying
that
the
Defense
Department
has
patented
an
algorithm
that’s
in
ALL
THE
MACHINES
so
that
they
can
manipulate
election
results.
But
Donald
Trump’s
bigly
margin
of
victory
overwhelmed
the
algorithm,
so
the
cheaters
had
to
feed
in
millions
more
fraudulent
ballots
under
cover
of
darkness
to
“backfill”
the
shortfall
and
ensure
Biden’s
victory.
As
for
that
stuff
about
a
House
Judiciary
Committee
hearing
in
Ohio
…
no,
just
no.
Now,
you
may
be
wondering
how
this
fraud
wasn’t
immediately
discovered
in
the
hand
recount.
And
the
answer
is
that
Sidney
“saw
a
report
to
that
effect
somewhere”
that
the
machines
in
Fulton
County,
Georgia,
were
kicking
out
94
percent
of
all
ballots
cast
so
they
could
be
adjudicated
by
a
county
election
official
who
was
IN
ON
IT.
POWELL:
And,
if
the
machine
kicks
the
vote
out,
then
it
goes
into
what’s
called
an
adjudication
file,
where
somebody
else
decides
what
the
vote’s
going
to
be.
And
my
understanding
from
one
of
the
reports
I
read
–
and
I
don’t
remember
which
one
–was
that
the
adjudication
rate
for
Fulton
County
was,
like,
94
percent.
There
should
never
be
an
adjudication
rate,
frankly,
of
more
than
1
percent.
That
should’ve
rendered
Fulton
County
just
–
that
should’ve
rendered
the
Georgia
results,
frankly,
invalid.STAFF
COUNSEL:
So,
based
on
this
information
that
you’re
referring
to,
your
understanding
is
that
94
percent,
almost
all
of
the
votes
in
Fulton
County
were
sent
to
adjudication,
and
some
individual
had
to
decide
who
that
vote
should
be
for?POWELL:
Exactly.STAFF
COUNSEL:
And
what’s
your
understanding
as
to
who
did
that?
Which
individual
was
adjudicating
94
percent
of
the
ballots
in
Fulton
County?POWELL:
I
do
not
know.
Not
convinced?
Watch
this
then.
So
far,
so
batshit.
But
since
this
is
a
legal
website,
let’s
skip
to
the
fun
part
where
the
committee
asks
about
Powell’s
fundraising
for
her
legal
efforts
to
overturn
the
results
of
an
election
which
her
candidate
lost
by
more
than
7
million
votes.
If
you
want
to
follow
along
with
the
fun,
skip
to
PDF
page
110
where
Powell
denies
having
anything
to
do
with
Publix
heiress
Julie
Fancelli,
who
contributed
$3
million
to
the
pre-riot
rally
on
January
6,
only
to
be
confronted
with
a
$100,000
check
from
the
Julia
Fancelli
Living
Trust
made
out
to
Sidney
Powell,
PC.
STAFF
COUNSEL:
But
if
you
look
on
the
memo
line,
it
says:
Contribution
Defending
the
Republic
Election
Integrity
Fund.POWELL:
Yes.STAFF
COUNSEL:
Can
you
explain
what
that
entity
is
and
how
it’s
separate
from
Sidney
Powell,
PC?POWELL:
It
wasn’t
–
Defending
the
Republic
Election
Integrity
Fund
was
not
a
separate
entity.
It
was
an
account
I
set
up
at
Morgan
Stanley
equivalent
to
a
client
trust
fund
for
anybody
that
wanted
to
donate
to
helping
fund
the
election
efforts,
to
make
it
to
my
PC,
but
to
segregate
it
into
that
trust
fund.STAFF
COUNSEL:
And
sitting
here,
do
you
know
what
that
$100,000
was
for
given
that
it
was
made
to
the
PC
or
given
the
memo
for
the
contribution?POWELL:
I
mean,
my
understanding
is
was
that
it
was
for
us
to
fund
whatever
we
needed
to
do
in
our
work
on
figuring
out
what
happened
in
the
election.STAFF
COUNSEL:
And
where
did
you
get
that
understanding
from
or
who
did
you
get
that
understanding
from?POWELL:
Well,
I
mean,
just
the
fact
that
it
says
Defending
the
Republic
Election
Integrity
Fund.STAFF
COUNSEL:
So
just
from
the
name?POWELL:
Yes.
Powell
went
on
to
admit
that
it
wasn’t
a
PAC
or
a
501(c)4,
although
she
did
solicit
funds
as
if
it
was
the
latter.
In
fact
the
pot
of
money
was
just
an
account
at
Morgan
Stanley
which
she
identified
in
her
own
mind
as
being
set
aside
to
fund
election
litigation.
STAFF
COUNSEL:
So
there
was
public
reporting
that
in
November
2020
you
established
something
called
the
Legal
Defense
Fund
for
the
American
Republic,
and
that
was
alleged
to
be
a
501(c)
(4)
nonprofit.
Is
that
true?
Do
you
remember
that?POWELL:
Yeah.
That’s
where
the
real
cluster
comes
in,
okay?STAFF
COUNSEL:
Talk
me
through
that.POWELL:
Yeah.
A
person
by
the
name
of
Robert
Matheson,
I
understood,
volunteered
to
help
me
set
up
Defending
the
Republic.
Instead
of
setting
up
Defending
the
Republic,
he
set
up
this
LD
something.
And
when
I
figured
all
that
out
and
that
he
was
going
to
charge
an
exorbitant amount
of
money
also
when
I
thought
it
was
all
volunteer,
because
at
that
point
we
were
all
volunteers,
I
had
a
conniption
fit
and
started
pulling
it
all
away
from
him
as
fast
as
I
could
do
that.
And
it
took
some
doing
to
get
that
done
and
made
a
hell
of
a
mess
in
the
process.
Yes,
talk
us
through
the
“cluster”
and
the
“hell
of
a
mess”
in
your
accounts.
Nothing
can
go
wrong
here!
STAFF
COUNSEL:
Okay.
Can
you
explain
the
differences
of
that
for
me?POWELL:
Well,
the
money
that
went
into
the
Defending
the
Republic
Election
Integrity
Fund
ultimately
went
to
Defending
the
Republic,
Inc.
But
it’s
not
—
Defending
the
Republic
Election
Integrity
Fund
was
not
an
entity.STAFF
COUNSEL:
It’s
just
the
name
on
the
account?POWELL:
Right.STAFF
COUNSEL:
Okay.
And
then
that
account
would
make
payments
to
Defending
the
Republic?POWELL:
That
account,
all
at
once,
every
dime
that
went
into
that
account
went
into
that
account
at
Morgan
Stanley,
and
then,
in
one
fell
swoop,
months
later,
was
transferred
into
Defending
the
Republic,
Inc.STAFF
COUNSEL:
And
when
you
say
Inc.,
because
I
believe
they
are
both
Inc.,
is
it
the
(c)(4)
Inc.
or
the
PAC
Inc.?POWELL:
The
(c)
(4).
When
I
say
Inc.
I
mean
the
(c)
(4).STAFF
COUNSEL:
Okay.
That’s
super
helpful.POWELL:
Otherwise,
I’ll
call
it
the
PAC.STAFF
COUNSEL:
Okay.
And
then
my
understanding
is
the
initial
board
of
directors
for
the
Inc.
included
General
Flynn,
Lin
Wood,
and
I
believe
Patrick
Byrne.
Powell
went
on
to
accuse
Michael
Flynn
and
his
brother
Joseph
of
taking
advantage
of
a
time
when
she
was
sick
to
quit
and
“pay
themselves
significant
quote
‘moving
bonuses’
end
quote
and
spend
a
lot
of
money
that
didn’t
need
to
be
spent
and
then
walked
out
and
took
all
of
the
equipment
with
them
while
I
couldn’t
lift
my
head
off
the
bed.”
And
still
her
attorneys
said nothing,
only
interceding
when
the
committee
began
to
ask
questions
about
exactly
how
much
money
this
“cluster”
had
netted
Powell,
at
which
point
they
finally
objected
that
this
“wasn’t
really
an
area
that
was
within
the
scope
of
the
subpoena.”
YA
THINK?
There
is
so,
so
much
more,
including
a
list
of
people
who
might
be in
on
it,
including:
Rudy
Giuliani,
who
has
clients
in
Venezuela;
“a
lot
of
Republicans
and
Republican
governors,”
who
were
also
relying
on
the
crooked
algorithms
to
ensure
their
reelection;
Mark
Meadows,
whom
she
stopped
looping
in
on
her
findings
“because
I
wasn’t
sure
what
was
being
done
with
it”;
plus
that
whole
“self-interested
bunch”
from
the
campaign,
who
distrusted
her
because
she
was
a
woman
and
walked
out
shortly
after
she
started
talking
because
they
wanted
to
go
on
to
careers
on
K
street.
The
interview
ended
with
a
warning
from
Powell
that
the
committee
should
“really
closely
examine
the
intelligence
community
and
particularly
the
CIA
and
Department
of
Defense
for
their
role
in
all
of
this.”
HOOBOY.
Liz
Dye lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
writes
about
law
and
politics.