That hearsay is better then direct evidences?
Is this the road that libs want to go down? Proof of innocents? Creating law where their is none?
This entire hoax is noting more then gossip column around a water cooler…and the left wants to promote it as evidence?
Do you have a better source than WorldNetDaily?
There is a video of D Mike Quigley of ILL saying just that…at about 1 minute mark.
Is anyone else reporting this?
I am a reporter.
Consider it being reported that is backed up by actual evidence.
As your lawyer, I concur.
But that’s not what he said. He said it can be better under some circumstances. He did not offer an absolute preference for hearsay as you are suggesting.
This is exactly what he said.
If you watch the tape, he clearly qualified the statement as applying in only some circumstances, he was not proposing an absolute standard.
Anyone who watches the tape can hear and see what went on.
Flashback from Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.
Well, you see, when you got nothing, but you really WANT to impeach, you’ll settle for anything.
What does God have to do with this?
Clearly you didn’t watch the video.
As rare as impeachment is, one would think it would only be started if something impeachy happened
Yes because of Trumps mouth. It’s always because of his mouth. I never see him blamed for anything. The buck never stops with him. It’s always someone else.
But the WB should not have reported me
But Biden did the same thing (no he didn’t)
But Burisma is corrupt (so is the Trump foundation)
Which is why they are deposing Taylor’s assistant tomorrow.
Taylor says his assistant told him about a call that southland had with trump on July 26.
Taylor,s testimony is second hand hearsay.
His assistant will be direct testimony.
Biggest nothing I ever saw.
Do me a favor.
Biden mentioned how many times in the memo of the call.
Mulvaney saying it was quid pro quo.