As far as I can tell, the media is applying a ridiculous standard in this particular case. They are treating affidavits as random, individual statements, ignoring many of them, and they corroborate each other, which strengthen the claims. They also ignore that the people who gave sworn affidavits have signed up to be summoned for cross-examination in court and that their claims are specific and can be checked for verification/falsification. In what other cases would media outright de-legitimize eye witness testimony?
Regarding Powell's part of the case, the evidence that has been claimed is weaker than Giuliano's. IIRC, the only piece of evidence she has alluded to so far has been a single sworn affidavit, however, this appears to be corroborated by statistical evidence. I am also assuming that the affidavit she is alluding to is from Michael Flynn. Powell referred to a high ranking Military Intelligence Officer, and Flynn, as we all know, was the Director of National Intelligence. She seems very confident and is probably keeping everything very closed for the moment, due to the massive implications of the case. Tucker Carlson complained that they weren't given any details, and talked about other people on the team or in the White House who hadn't seen the details themselves. That tells me they are keeping info away from the people they know talk to media, because they do not trust any of them any longer, because why would they? why would they risk landing what, if the allegations are true and it appears they strongly believe they are, would be the biggest case of their lives by trusting media people they know are untrustworthy just to maybe make small gains in public opinion? the courts have a lot higher chance of legitimizing their claims than any media has. If I had earth shattering, smoking gun, proof, that there was rampant voter fraud that changed the outcome of an election **I** would not release that to the media ...especially what the media has become today (a propaganda machine). I would only present it if everyone in the room was sworn in and under oath. I also would be reluctant to reveal evidence before a Judge that I knew was a political activist. I would be far more comfortable revealing evidence to a Judge that absolutely knew that Joe Biden is a fraud, and has been exposed as a fraud, numerous times during his political career; a Judge that was a direct victim of Joe Biden's fraudulent and malicious claims.