hey... i'm a little nervous to ask this, but please know that it is a genuine question that i'm trying to understand.
i know the crazies are saying "WELL IT'S ALL HEARSAY" and they're mostly delusional, but... isn't a lot of what she said hearsay? Is the point that she has now opened the door for (for example) the Secret Service and others to testify when they may have otherwise not? is hearsay more accepted in these type of hearings?
i swear i am genuinely trying to understand!
First and foremost, hearsay is a rule of evidence in court, not in Congress.
Second, even if it were and the federal rules of evidence applied, the hearsay rule has 23 exceptions (there are more under other rules so in total there's like 30 exceptions). I can't figure out how to link it, but on twitter Steve Vladek has a really good thread explaining why those trying to dismiss what she said as hearsay are full of crap.
ETA: not to mention, statements made by the opposing party (again, in court) offered against that party are by definition not hearsay.
hey... i'm a little nervous to ask this, but please know that it is a genuine question that i'm trying to understand.
i know the crazies are saying "WELL IT'S ALL HEARSAY" and they're mostly delusional, but... isn't a lot of what she said hearsay? Is the point that she has now opened the door for (for example) the Secret Service and others to testify when they may have otherwise not? is hearsay more accepted in these type of hearings?
thank you! i'll check out the links and recommendations for a better understanding. you guys always have good educational recs and i appreciate it!
Also I think.. like I provided the very base level of the definition of hearsay, and then StrawberryBlondie provided a lot more of the application in context.
This is a great example of an issue that is in depth, but people have taken a grain of truth and ran with it and made it seem like that kernel is the truth!
thank you! i'll check out the links and recommendations for a better understanding. you guys always have good educational recs and i appreciate it!
Also I think.. like I provided the very base level of the definition of hearsay, and then StrawberryBlondie provided a lot more of the application in context.
This is a great example of an issue that is in depth, but people have taken a grain of truth and ran with it and made it seem like that kernel is the truth!
absolutely.
i really am trying to keep up and ALL THIS is mostly insane so i do admit that i'm stumbling through it a bit.
Post by Velar Fricative on Jun 29, 2022 12:24:57 GMT -5
It's pretty crazy that Tony Ornato took leave from the Secret Service to serve in a political capacity with Trump and is now back from leave in the SS. He's in a training capacity and not protecting VIPs, but still. No wonder Biden wanted his detail from when he was VP - I imagine much of the SS is full-blown MAGA and while some might be capable of doing their jobs to protect Biden and his family, I don't trust these people.
hey... i'm a little nervous to ask this, but please know that it is a genuine question that i'm trying to understand.
i know the crazies are saying "WELL IT'S ALL HEARSAY" and they're mostly delusional, but... isn't a lot of what she said hearsay? Is the point that she has now opened the door for (for example) the Secret Service and others to testify when they may have otherwise not? is hearsay more accepted in these type of hearings?
i swear i am genuinely trying to understand!
First and foremost, hearsay is a rule of evidence in court, not in Congress.
Second, even if it were and the federal rules of evidence applied, the hearsay rule has 23 exceptions (there are more under other rules so in total there's like 30 exceptions). I can't figure out how to link it, but on twitter Steve Vladek has a really good thread explaining why those trying to dismiss what she said as hearsay are full of crap.
ETA: not to mention, statements made by the opposing party (again, in court) offered against that party are by definition not hearsay.
I found this link.
Thank you for the information. My DH of all people was saying her testimony didn't matter too much since it's hearsay and I thought he must be wrong but I didn't have anything to show him.
Not to mention that they have the texts, email messages, and transcripts of a LOT of what happened that day. That is not hearsay. Much of what she was saying is corroborated through other sources.
Post by underwaterrhymes on Jun 29, 2022 20:13:13 GMT -5
Evidently closed captioning couldn’t quite figure out Pat Cippollone and gave it its best shot with “Patsy Baloney” and now Twitter has decided that’s his new name.
Evidently closed captioning couldn’t quite figure out Pat Cippollone and gave it its best shot with “Patsy Baloney” and now Twitter has decided that’s his new name.
LOL
I’m now going to read Patsy Baloney as “Patsy Baloney”. 🤣
Evidently closed captioning couldn’t quite figure out Pat Cippollone and gave it its best shot with “Patsy Baloney” and now Twitter has decided that’s his new name.
LOL
I’m now going to read Patsy Baloney as “Patsy Baloney”. 🤣
Wasn’t DTJ reportedly nicknamed Fredo? It’s all so fitting.
The House Jan. 6 Committee has subpoenaed Sarah Matthews, the Trump White House’s deputy press secretary who resigned immediately after the Capitol attack, who’s agreed to testify publicly in front of the panel as soon as next week, according to CNN.
The House Jan. 6 Committee has subpoenaed Sarah Matthews, the Trump White House’s deputy press secretary who resigned immediately after the Capitol attack, who’s agreed to testify publicly in front of the panel as soon as next week, according to CNN.
Fantastic timing! I'm stuck in a hospital waiting room with my very Trumpy MIL all day. I hope it's playing in the room.
Salacious details like ketchup aside, I am so disgusted at the apathy of Meadows. She describes him in 2 key and horrible moments sitting or laying on the couch just scrolling in his phone and giving half-assed, dismissive answers. Like a damn teenager on TikTok not listening. Gross.
Weeks before the Capitol attack, top Republican political activists Roger Stone and Ali Alexander identified the January 6 congressional certification as the final chance for Donald Trump to attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.
The focus on the congressional certification, according to sources familiar with the matter, was one of several areas they marked as potential flashpoints to exploit as leaders of the “Stop the Steal” movement to help Trump reverse his defeat to Joe Biden.
As Stone and Alexander mounted their political operation, their activities were recorded by two conservative film-makers in the post-2020 election period and in the weeks before January 6.
The access meant the film-makers, Jason Rink and Paul Escandon, captured footage of the leaders of the Stop the Steal movement and their interactions with top Trump allies, according to a teaser for the documentary titled The Steal.
In following Stop the Steal, the film-makers’ project documented key moments in the timeline leading up to the Capitol attack, including an “occupation” of the Georgia state capitol in November, and rallies in Washington that almost seemed like dry runs for January 6.
Weeks before the Capitol attack, top Republican political activists Roger Stone and Ali Alexander identified the January 6 congressional certification as the final chance for Donald Trump to attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.
The focus on the congressional certification, according to sources familiar with the matter, was one of several areas they marked as potential flashpoints to exploit as leaders of the “Stop the Steal” movement to help Trump reverse his defeat to Joe Biden.
As Stone and Alexander mounted their political operation, their activities were recorded by two conservative film-makers in the post-2020 election period and in the weeks before January 6.
The access meant the film-makers, Jason Rink and Paul Escandon, captured footage of the leaders of the Stop the Steal movement and their interactions with top Trump allies, according to a teaser for the documentary titled The Steal.
In following Stop the Steal, the film-makers’ project documented key moments in the timeline leading up to the Capitol attack, including an “occupation” of the Georgia state capitol in November, and rallies in Washington that almost seemed like dry runs for January 6.
Two thoughts: 1. Can we please have a second Roger Stone perp walk? One just wasn’t enough 2. How do I not remember an occupation of the GA state capitol??