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)
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.
It’s such a lazy, uninformed and boring way to discuss anything
And now the ‘‘libs weaponizing the intelligence services’’ has become the mantra of the paranoid.
If nothing else, reading the Report will make your posts on it accurate. Amirite?
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.
it depends. is he indebted to iranians?
No. Obama was. He sent them a plane load of foreign currency to pay it off. Rememba?
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.
You think we’re lazy? Say it ain’t so! We get up everyday hoping to make a good impression on liberals.
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.
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.
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.
conan:Need some tissues?
Nah man… I am good.
I am living in a successful part of the country devoid of animosity towards my fellow citizens.
What I am feeling is pity and sadness that there is a large enough portion of the country that is so disaffected that they would fall for such an obvious con when they are the ones who are going to get hurt the most by it.
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?
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.
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.
“There are some people who actually have real bravado.” - crusty Hannity keyboard warrior
“There are some people who actually have real bravado.”
Certainly. But they don’t demonstrate it while hiding behind a screen name. Any wuss can do that.
Barr is the AG.
DougBH: WuWei:DOJ, Mueller office say 'no conflict' in views on Trump, obstruction
A stake through lib hearts…
Of course there is no conflict. The only conflict occurs when one misinterprets Mueller’s statement that he did not determine whether or not Trump committed illegal obstruction to mean the same thing as Mueller determined that Trump committed illegal obstruction but that he could not indict. That is the irreconcilable misinterpretation.
“As set forth in the report, after the investigation, if we had confidence that the president did not clearly commit a crime, we would have said so,” and they did not.
Innocent until proven guilty. And they did not.
What I’m trying is prevent libs from turning this country into a replica of old Soviet Union.
Kill your radio.
You mean the IG that had 400 plus pages of Bias within FBI etc only to conclude bias didn’t effected their decision?
That one?
It’s why I don’t trust Michael Horowitz. He’s as much of insider as they come.
If you don’t trust anyone, you never have to accept any results, ever. This is actually a smart tactic. Hat tip.
He deferred to Congress. You know this. Youre playing.
His job was to prove guilt. You know this. You’re playing.