Predisent Donald J. Skroob: Episode X: Purple Raining to Impeachment

[Gredival]

"In keeping with the three evidentiary requirements, the Hearsay Rule, as outlined in the Federal Rules of Evidence, prohibits most statements made outside a courtroom from being used as evidence in court. This is because statements made out of court normally are not made under oath, a judge or jury cannot personally observe the demeanor of someone who makes a statement outside the courtroom, and an opposing party cannot cross-examine such a declarant (the person making the statement). Out-of-court statements hinder the ability of the judge or jury to probe testimony for inaccuracies caused by Ambiguity, insincerity, faulty perception, or erroneous memory. Thus, statements made out of court are perceived as untrustworthy."

1. A House inquiry isn't trial.

2. Statements must be offered for the truth of the matter asserted to be hearsay. Zealot knows this because he's a lawyer.

3. Statements by defendants that are adverse to the defendant's interest are also an exception to the hearsay rule.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[archibaldcrane]

This is some "the American experiment is doomed" shit

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...mation-day-one

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[kuronosan]

I have people in my family who believe the Republicans when they say the process is illegitimate... just because they're Republicans.

People are fucking stupid.

[mallister]

https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/...chment-hearing

This sums things up pretty well.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

that was great.

[Cichy]

I have people in my family who believe the Republicans when they say the process is illegitimate... just because they're Republicans.

People are fucking stupid.

you should disown them, the great democratic family is the only thing you need amirtie

[guartz]

1. A House inquiry isn't trial.

2. Statements must be offered for the truth of the matter asserted to be hearsay. Zealot knows this because he's a lawyer.

3. Statements by defendants that are adverse to the defendant's interest are also an exception to the hearsay rule.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Ah I see. So if I understand correctly, say I'm in court for stealing money from idk a store. A witness says "I heard my neighbor say Guartz was broke" that statement is admissible because it relates to the truth of the matter.

a counter example would be of something not admissible "I heard from my neighbor Guartz robbed a store" edit: that is, if this statement is offered as proof that I robbed the store.

Is this correct understanding?

[guartz]

you should disown them, the great democratic family is the only thing you need amirtie

hey whoa there, "family" is a term of patriarchal oppression.

edit: Do better.

[Tyche]

My favorite part of all this is guartz arguing with a government attorney over hearsay and ignoring the posts that give specifics, then moves on to someone else with the same argument. Classic Guartz.

[Gredival]

Ah I see. So if I understand correctly, say I'm in court for stealing money from idk a store. A witness says "I heard my neighbor say Guartz was broke" that statement is admissible because it relates to the truth of the matter.

a counter example would be of something not admissible "I heard from my neighbor Guartz robbed a store" edit: that is, if this statement is offered as proof that I robbed the store.

Is this correct understanding?

Jim says "Jenny told me that he and Dean are getting a divorce."

Inadmissible as proof of Dean's motive to kill her.

Admissible as proof that Jim and Jenny have a close relationship and discuss important things (which could be used to provide foundation for another statement from Jim like, "Jenny was noticeably distraught and suffering from mental distress.")

[Yabby]

Bitch its entertaining cause you never try to engage with it. You sit on the sidelines laughing, wondering why no one else wants to continue pulling their hair out for the lulz

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Mostly true. I do sit on the sidelines and laugh, but I've stated a few times the only thing I wonder is why people engage him in the first place. That's on you guys. Other than that, I just enjoy the show if people feel the need to keep going with him.

[guartz]

Jim says "Jenny told me that he and Dean are getting a divorce."

Inadmissible as proof of Dean's motive to kill her.

Admissible as proof that Jim and Jenny have a close relationship and discuss important things (which could be used to provide foundation for another statement from Jim like, "Jenny was noticeably distraught and suffering from mental distress.")

That makes sense, thanks Gred

[kuronosan]

you should disown them, the great democratic family is the only thing you need amirtie

Difference between conservative and Republican.

[Zealot]

The fight for Trump's tax returns has officially gone to the Supreme Court. We're either finally gonna see them or never. Also RBG has been out with the flu.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Athas]

So any chance Trump's appointees recuse themselves?

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Tapatalk

[Lokus]

I can already tell you how that's going to play out for the most transparent President ever.

[mallister]

assclown that has never tried a case or even made oral arguments in front of a court is now a lifetime federal judge. thanks republicans!

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/steve...192323329.html

[Gredival]

assclown that has never tried a case or even made oral arguments in front of a court is now a lifetime federal judge. thanks republicans!

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/steve...192323329.html

This is the second one.

Also the GOP has moved to remove ABA vetting from the confirmation process as a result.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[guartz]

GOP felt ABA vetting was getting too political for a while now. Im not surprised this is happening.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/w...icial-activism

[Zealot]

Who the fuck needs this nonpartisan body that oversees the entire legal profession making our appointments, guided entirely by political alignment, political?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[guartz]

In impeachmints news:

Ukrainian foreign minister Prystaiko denied Sondland's additional testimony, the part where sondland said he told Prystaiko that no aid unless investigation.

Testimony and leaked conversations from Nuland (top State Dept official handling Ukraine) and Pyatt (U.S. ambassador to Ukraine) from previous admins are making rounds in not fake news outlets again showing Trump had good reason to investigate Burisma.

Trump raised another 3 mil in the last 2 days

Jim Hoft (journalist) tweeted that Bill Bar met with the President, president dropped his schedule and summoned his staff for a meeting.
Wonder what that's about?