Joke 6 Committee "Hearing"

[cd288]

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

After all the "hearsay you're honor" I heard during the amber heard trial, there is no way anything at these jan 6th trials would be admissable in court, not a chance.

"He reached over from the back seat like an action movie, and grabbed the wheel and tried to drive the beast right up the stairs himself!"

Except she never said he did that. She said someone told him he did. And I’ve outlined multiple ways in which her statements would be admissible at trial.

Love when non lawyers try to pretend like they understand the hearsay rule which is honestly one of the most complex rules of evidence lol. You quite literally have zero idea what you’re talking about but I’m not surprised by that.

The vast majority of statements made in testimony to the committee would be admissible at trial. Including basically all of hutchinson’s btw.

[cd288]

Originally Posted by Castle2.0 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yes, we should have put some allies on the Witch Hunt and legitimized it...

"You know... you could have had representation in this kangaroo court..."

I mean hey if you feel like you don’t want people on there for whatever reason that’s fine. But then Trump can’t whine about how he’s not being defended in the hearings after he told people not to join the committee lol

[cd288]

Originally Posted by Castle2.0 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

The ways I explained to get it in were literally on the list you copied and pasted from the rules of evidence you idiot lmao

[Jibartik]

Except she never said he did that. She said someone told him he did.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Skarne]

Pwnd

[Jibartik]

[Horza]

Jib is giving off serious Lennie vibes today. I really need to get around to rereading some Steinbeck sooner or later.

[Jibartik]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Ooloo]

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Except she never said he did that. She said someone told him he did. And I’ve outlined multiple ways in which her statements would be admissible at trial.

Love when non lawyers try to pretend like they understand the hearsay rule which is honestly one of the most complex rules of evidence lol. You quite literally have zero idea what you’re talking about but I’m not surprised by that.

The vast majority of statements made in testimony to the committee would be admissible at trial. Including basically all of hutchinson’s btw.

Right so in other words, her "testimony" is even *more* worthless!

Like, why are you defending it so hard? Two things can be true: hutchinson is a ridiculous, cynical distraction, but *also* if trump did do something wrong legally, he should be held accountable. Simple!

Then the rest of your post is some kind of credential flex about lol ur not a lawyer bro. Great, we don't all have to be lawyers to talk about the lawyery lawyer stuff anyway.

[Castle2.0]

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The ways I explained to get it in were literally on the list you copied and pasted from the rules of evidence you idiot lmao

Sorry pal, I hope you're not a lawyer. Not very persuasive.

"Bill told me Bob did this."

Effectively what she said. It matches none of the reasons you gave. Exclusions are quite specific and limited. Online degree?