Perhaps. But it was under oath, sworn testimony.The girl gave all hearsay, that only works in a Kangeroo Court
She heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend who.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Perhaps. But it was under oath, sworn testimony.The girl gave all hearsay, that only works in a Kangeroo Court
She heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend who.
Who has been proven to make shit up? You are showing your true colors. The ss report is hearsay until they testify under oath.Did I say it wasn't a hearing? Did I say hearsay wasn't allowed in hearings? No, I said it shouldn't be allowed so people wouldn't be allowed to make shit up.
Go for the hill of an Adam schiff not making shit up.... go for that hill..Who has been proven to make shit up? You are showing your true colors. The ss report is hearsay until they testify under oath.
She can be told something that's factually incorrect, and repeat it but not be lying. It's only a lie for her if says something she knows isn't true.If she is lying she faces felony charges. Let's see if those trying to discredit her will.
During the select hearings? The troll is trying to reengage.Go for the hill of an Adam schiff not making shit up.... go for that hill..
This guy gets it. The vast majority of her claims were 3rd hand knowledge. Even the conversations where she asked people what they talked about on the phone had 3rd party info. I don't think I have ever seen thr message get all the way around the game of telephone.She can be told something that's factually incorrect, and repeat it but not be lying. It's only a lie for her if says something she knows isn't true.
Stop. How many Republican members of the Trump administration have come to her side? Would you like to make a wager as to who will be vindicated, SS or Hutchinson?She can be told something that's factually incorrect, and repeat it but not be lying. It's only a lie for her if says something she knows isn't true.
I suggest you suckle my knuckle.You don’t know your ass from your elbow. I suggest you take a seat.
It’s overrated depending on where you live, what kind of person you are, and how much money you make. Houses can be money pits and if you’re unprepared for that, you can end up in a lot of trouble. That said, if you can get a no down payment loan without pmi (good luck), it’s a no brainer.How do you feel about home ownership as a vehicle for gaining wealth for the middle class?
My true colors lol. I don't give two shits about Trump and what he might or might not have done. Lock his ass up so I can stop hearing most of you bitch and complain and we can get this message board back to non politics. I'm one of the few that has an open mind and can see both sides. Something many of you should try out once in a while.Who has been proven to make shit up? You are showing your true colors. The ss report is hearsay until they testify under oath.
Not many are going to agree with you on this.My true colors lol. I don't give two shits about Trump and what he might or might not have done. Lock his ass up so I can stop hearing most of you bitch and complain and we can get this message board back to non politics. I'm one of the few that has an open mind and can see both sides. Something many of you should try out once in a while.
👏 👏 👏My true colors lol. I don't give two shits about Trump and what he might or might not have done. Lock his ass up so I can stop hearing most of you bitch and complain and we can get this message board back to non politics. I'm one of the few that has an open mind and can see both sides. Something many of you should try out once in a while.
Why would anyone care what the 12 people pretending to be 30 on this board have to say?Not many are going to agree with you on this.
It seems many of the far right on this board don't like trump, or so they say.Not many are going to agree with you on this.
Glad you are back. Try not to catch the hammer.It’s overrated depending on where you live, what kind of person you are, and how much money you make. Houses can be money pits and if you’re unprepared for that, you can end up in a lot of trouble. That said, if you can get a no down payment loan without pmi (good luck), it’s a no brainer.
I think it's clear it's allowed during this hearing. I'm saying it shouldn't be so things like this don't occur. Anyone can say anything with no way to back up their claim.
For someone that knows that law, he doesn't know the law.1. Not allowing a witness to freely tell his/her story or applying restrictions to how he/she can respond to questions turns the hearing into a quasi-juidical proceeding with constant interruptions for rulings on admissability. You don't want that when you are conducting an investigation to determine facts.
2. In this case, its not certain Hutchinson has nothing to back up her now disputed claim. The Committee already had sworn testimony from Engels and Omato prior to her public testimony. IMHO - I doubt they (the Committee and her personal attorney) would green-light that part of her testimony if there is strong counter-factual testiony on the record from the two principals. If she freelanced - fine, allow witnesses to appear and testify under oath so they can relay their account of the incident.
Oh, the super troll is giving him mega smilies and support.Not many are going to agree with you on this.
You’re a whiny person. Quit being such a pansyFor someone that knows that law, he doesn't know the law.
@Finance85Stop. How many Republican members of the Trump administration have come to her side? Would you like to make a wager as to who will be vindicated, SS or Hutchinson?
Most of them were NOT 3rd hand info.This guy gets it. The vast majority of her claims were 3rd hand knowledge. Even the conversations where she asked people what they talked about on the phone had 3rd party info. I don't think I have ever seen thr message get all the way around the game of telephone.
Gonna have time agree to disagree. The vast majority of it were conversations that happen afterwords between her and Meadows regarding conversations Meadows had with Trump ect.Most of them were NOT 3rd hand info.
I’m aware of one for sure(vehicle to the cap) and possibly one other, but, I was in and out of the car a bit.
most of what she relayed, from what I heard, was in fact first hand knowledge.
Z
Just providing theories. Somehow I doubt the accuracy of claims made by someone that are contradicted by people who were actually present. But what do I know? The libs on here have brainwashed you into sheep hood.
Yes we will have to agree to disagree on this oneGonna have time agree to disagree. The vast majority of it were conversations that happen afterwords between her and Meadows regarding conversations Meadows had with Trump ect.
Hearsay evidence is not admissible in court unless a statue or rule provides otherwise. Therefore, even if a statement is really hearsay, it may still be admissible if an exception applies. The Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) contains nearly thirty of these exceptions to providing hearsay evidence.Gonna have time agree to disagree. The vast majority of it were conversations that happen afterwords between her and Meadows regarding conversations Meadows had with Trump ect.
I'm certainly no Philadelphia lawyer and it very well might be allowed into court but i also think you would agree that IF Trump does ever go to court he is going to show up with a group of lawyers that are the best money can buy and that stuff will get lambasted. That's the kind of stuff I was talking about yesterday. If you arengoing to go after a slimy person you have to have every angle of escape covered.Hearsay evidence is not admissible in court unless a statue or rule provides otherwise. Therefore, even if a statement is really hearsay, it may still be admissible if an exception applies. The Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) contains nearly thirty of these exceptions to providing hearsay evidence.
We are both of the opinion that her saying anything in court about the conversation Meadows may have had with Trump would be objectionable, but, due to the above, MIGHT, be overruled and allowed. I believe, I’m my limited experience, the types of conversations that might be allowed would be exactly what Ms.Hutchinson relayed through conversations with her boss and what was discussed in those conversations.
I repeatedly condemned the events that we've seen play out from video that day. But do you really think an obviously one sided commission with hearsay is a healthy exercise?
Go for the hill of an Adam schiff not making shit up.... go for that hill..
FUNFACT: They DO allow hearsay in actual trialsI know the rules of court and it's not allowed. If they are allowing it during this hearing, that is the perfect reason they don't allow hearsay in an actual trial.
FUNFACT 2.0: It's not the "rules of court", it's referred to as the Rules of Evidence.I know the rules of court and it's not allowed. If they are allowing it during this hearing, that is the perfect reason they don't allow hearsay in an actual trial.
I was commenting on whether or not she was lying. I watched part of her testimony. She seemed credible to me. That doesn't mean what she says happened actually did happen. That's the nature of 2nd hand information. It's called nuance. Everyone would love for it to be black or white. Sometimes it's not.Stop. How many Republican members of the Trump administration have come to her side? Would you like to make a wager as to who will be vindicated, SS or Hutchinson?
Where are you hearing that she might have been lied to? Those in the Trump Administration (outside of the idiot himself) seem to believe her.I was commenting on whether or not she was lying. I watched part of her testimony. She seemed credible to me. That doesn't mean what she says happened actually did happen. That's the nature of 2nd hand information. It's called nuance. Everyone would love for it to be black or white. Sometimes it's not.
Seriously use your brain. Do you just blindly believe everything you hear, especially relating to politics, and especially related to trump and the “1/6 coup conspiracy?” My god, this is the biggest joke/show of our lifetimes and you all line up for your daily oohs and ahhs fed to you by hacks with agendas.Where are you hearing that she might have been lied to? Those in the Trump Administration (outside of the idiot himself) seem to believe her.
But “the SS” did not report that! An anonymous source reported that he learned the SS had personnel that would disagree with what the secretary reportedly heard. There is a difference here Hawkman. Now, all the SS personnel has to do is testify to such for the Committee.Well I did work third shift, but as I stated NBC nightly news is where I heard that secret service would be willing to testify that it never occurred.
I remembered why I have you on ignore. Wow.Seriously use your brain. Do you just blindly believe everything you hear, especially relating to politics, and especially related to trump and the “1/6 coup conspiracy?” My god, this is the biggest joke/show of our lifetimes and you all line up for your daily oohs and ahhs fed to you by hacks with agendas.
I never found very many Iowans who admitted they voted for Branstad, either.It seems many of the far right on this board don't like trump, or so they say.