Quote:
Originally Posted by cd288
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
You pointed out one statement that you thought was hearsay. I explained how in a trial that statement would be admissible. So we've already done that exercise, just because you don't like the answer or you don't have the legal understanding to process the information I gave you doesn't mean it's wrong lol.
Sorry, it's not hearsay lol. Keep panicking though.
Who cares about the midterms when it comes to this? I couldn't care less if the Committee has zero effect on the midterms. It's about accountability for people who tried to disrupt the democratic process for their own personal benefit. The hearings will be done and the referral to DOJ completed before the midterms...could it affect the midterms who knows but I don't care if it has zero effect on them at all, I'm just happy people are going to go down for the crimes they committed.
And I'm a Republican so this isn't an issue of political bias...the sanctity of our system is more important than anything - and everyone should feel that way, but you're so obsessed with "owning the Libs" that you'd sacrifice the good of our country just to be able to post "lol sucks Dems" on a message board. Good job.
|
You gave a number of ways in which statements might be allowed as an exception. You pontificated how maybe somehow possibly the statement might be accepted.
I asked you to pick a number from the list given in the law. You didn't.
Not panicking. Largely unconcerned with this nothing-burger. If they indict the Mayor of Portland who allowed for an actual insurrection, I would take them seriously.
We have limited resources in this short life. I can't be bothered by boys crying wolf and liars. If a group of people constantly lie for personal political gain while simultaneously promoting ideas and policies that are destructive... yes, I won't be spending time listening to them or taking them seriously.
Oh, and if anyone committed an actual crime, D or R, hang 'em high.