Bob Mueller speaking at 11 A.M

So true. If you listen to the righting media blather, you’ll realize these guys do almost ZERO thinking for themselves.

You ‘‘know’’ nothing of the sort. You have a blind paranoia from listen to too much winger radio, that’s for sure.

You’re both wrong.

If that testimony is used as evidence that the sky was, in fact, blue at that moment - it is hearsay (interestingly enough, this particular example fits within one of the Hearsay Rule’s exceptions as an immediately verifiable fact, since Barr could immediately look out the window to confirm it)

1 Like

Hearsay is a statement that: (1) was not made while testifying at the current trial or hearing; and (2) a party offers in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement.

1 Like

And now the ‘‘libs weaponizing the intelligence services’’ has become the mantra of the paranoid.

Many of his supporters are lazy and are completely content letting Hannity, Limbaugh et al digest and explain everything “in their own way”.

Cannot imagine why there’s so much misinformation in some heads.

No. Obama was. He sent them a plane load of foreign currency to pay it off. Rememba?

You think we’re lazy? Say it ain’t so! We get up everyday hoping to make a good impression on liberals. :grinning::grin::sweat_smile::joy:

Who puts the misinformation in your head? Rachel? Don? How about Anderson?

Probably because she was telling you what someone else did even though it was to her.

Someone telling you what they themselves did is not hearsay, otherwise prison snitches would not be a thing because it would all be hearsay.

1 Like

Amazing all the personal attacks going on, and If I say someone should stop thinking in binary mindset I get a month time out for such small thing. And in here we have one poster attacking same one over and over and calling them crazy. It so hard to know what rules are on this forum.

4 Likes

The testimony of “prison snitches” is hearsay.

It generally fall under one of the exceptions that allow them to be admissible in court - usually the “excited utterance” exception.

Interesting. I live in a part of the nation where you dont dare wear a MAGA hat or risk some younger white dude telling you to take it off or face he consequences of their wrath. You can be a Trumpie…but you better not show it. Tissues anyone?

This would all end if people imagined that they were talking to the person face to face. Nobody has the guts to say some of this crap in person. Internet bravado is the lamest form of bravado.

3 Likes

“There are some people who actually have real bravado.” - crusty Hannity keyboard warrior

Certainly. But they don’t demonstrate it while hiding behind a screen name. Any wuss can do that.

Barr is the AG.

Innocent until proven guilty. And they did not.

Kill your radio.

2 Likes

If you don’t trust anyone, you never have to accept any results, ever. This is actually a smart tactic. Hat tip.

His job was to prove guilt. You know this. You’re playing.