I'm hearing quid pro quo is out
Comments
-
The people with first hand knowledge have already said there was no threat
Or bribery
Or quid pro quo
The transcript showed that when Trump released it -
None of your witnesses have first hand knowledge. Why do you think that is cirrhosis? If they supposedly heard this information third hand, they certainly must know who heard it first hand. Again, why do you think that is cirrhosis?CirrhosisDawg said:
It’s going so horribly for trump that he’s ordered anyone with first hand knowledge not to testify.HoustonHusky said:It’s going so well for the Democrats they have now resorted to claiming hearsay is better than direct evidence.
Further proof they have the mentality of teenage girls... -
-
Works in court......Dude61 said:I am being told there is plenty of good evidence:
"Hearsay can be much better evidence than direct [evidence]." – Democrat Rep. Mike Quigley -
That was cringy. The better point is that this an investigation, not a trial. Hearsay is used all the time in order to discover admissible evidence. The folks bitching about hearsay know that. They also know that the White House has instructed the first hand witnesses not to testify—though Mulvaney gave the game away on your teevee.Dude61 said:I am being told there is plenty of good evidence:
"Hearsay can be much better evidence than direct [evidence]." – Democrat Rep. Mike Quigley
-
All the adults read the transcript. Not sure what Jennifer said to you.CirrhosisDawg said:
It’s going so horribly for trump that he’s ordered anyone with first hand knowledge not to testify.HoustonHusky said:It’s going so well for the Democrats they have now resorted to claiming hearsay is better than direct evidence.
Further proof they have the mentality of teenage girls...
Teenage girls... -
We already know what the first hand witnesses saidHHusky said:
That was cringy. The better point is that this an investigation, not a trial. Hearsay is used all the time in order to discover admissible evidence. The folks bitching about hearsay know that. They also know that the White House has instructed the first hand witnesses not to testify—though Mulvaney gave the game away on your teevee.Dude61 said:I am being told there is plenty of good evidence:
"Hearsay can be much better evidence than direct [evidence]." – Democrat Rep. Mike Quigley
No quid pro quo
-
Imagine claiming you have a whistleblower then crying because people who actually heard the call said nothing is there
And your whistleblower is nowhere to be found -
Of course there was a quid pro quo. “Get over it.”RaceBannon said:
We already know what the first hand witnesses saidHHusky said:
That was cringy. The better point is that this an investigation, not a trial. Hearsay is used all the time in order to discover admissible evidence. The folks bitching about hearsay know that. They also know that the White House has instructed the first hand witnesses not to testify—though Mulvaney gave the game away on your teevee.Dude61 said:I am being told there is plenty of good evidence:
"Hearsay can be much better evidence than direct [evidence]." – Democrat Rep. Mike Quigley
No quid pro quo -
I touched a sensitive nerve here in trumptard land. Trump’s plumbers ignore subpoenas (Barr’s DOJ won’t enforce and court resolution would take months) and trump’s impeached with additional articles of obstruction. Or they could testify and clear everything up with first hand knowledge, right trumptards?
