"Watergate Prosecutor Shreds GOP 'Hearsay' Argument, Says He's Jailed People for 30-40 Years Based on Similar Testimony"
By Melissa Lemieux On 11/14/19 at 6:36 PM EST
Trained lawyers defending Tweety Trump are desperately hoping they can make a case that all the allegations against the Tweety abuse of power in "hearsay." Some kinds of hearsay, i.e., indirect evidence, however are admissible as evidence in a court of law.
Tweety Trump will be accused of bribery against Ukraine in talks with the Ukraine President. Tweety withheld Congressionally approved funding to buy defensive weapons against the Russian incursion In Latin it is called Quid Pro Quo.
"What the quid pro quo admitted by Gordon Sondland looked like"
By Philip Bump National correspondent focused largely on the numbers behind politics
November 20, 2019 at 10:30 AM
"Sondland says he told Pence that Ukraine military aid appeared conditioned on political investigations"
By Rosalind S. Helderman Reporter focusing on political enterprise stories and investigations
November 20, 2019 at 1:03 PM
Among some of the worst results possible from the GOP defending Tweety Trump with obviously false narratives, making his actions re Ukraine OK is possibly the worst. Here's how it could work in a way the GOP might like, or not, if Warren is elected in 2020!
I do not enjoy reporting what I see, reporting what I read, and reporting what I hear Tweety Trump say, it is always ugliness, sadistic bullying, narcissistic bragging, and self-aggrading praise, dividing our country further every day into His Cultish Camp, and All Other Americans who disagree with him in any way.
"Republicans are pushing the U.S. to accept quid pro quo [FOR PERSONAL POLITICAL GAIN] as the new normal"
[I INSERTED CAPS. The original headline is horrendously misleading! The Editor was stupid not to see it. Look below for what I mean by critical Editing. See Wyoming's "We're On It!" story]
By Robert Kagan - Contributing columnist focusing on foreign affairs - Nov. 18, 2019
"Washington, D.C., March 2, 2024. Attorney General Kamala D. Harris traveled to London last week to meet with top advisers to British Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn, it has been learned. The topic? Allegations of questionable behavior by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) while traveling overseas in 2021. According to White House sources, British intelligence picked up snippets of phone conversations that they claim could be damaging to the senator, who is running for the Republican presidential nomination and polling second in most of next week’s Super Tuesday primaries.
The Corbyn government appears willing to share the Cotton information as negotiations on the Anglo-American free-trade agreement come down to the wire. According to sources, President Elizabeth Warren has indicated a willingness to compromise in the negotiations but has made known through intermediaries that she’d welcome a “favor” from Corbyn. British officials did not respond to questions, but one official close to the prime minister told reporters, after requesting anonymity in order to speak freely, “[Expletive] Tom Cotton. The prime minister detests him.”"
It's a joke narrative, but possible if the kind of Tweety Quid Pro Quo diplomacy became the new norm? And the GOP presses Americans to believe al their many excuses and defenses for Tweety's call to Ukraine and his withholding essential funds for Ukraine's defense for his personal POLITICAL gain. Are Republicans saying the Quid Pro Duo is not a crime and it is OK?
"It’s a genuine question that Republicans must answer somehow. What should be the consequences for a president who does what even most Republicans now acknowledge Trump and his top advisers did? If those Republicans believe that impeachment is too severe, what kind of penalty do they propose? If the answer is none at all, then Republicans will have opened the floodgates for foreign penetration of the U.S. political system. They will drown along with the rest of America."
The other notions, and each seems more silly than the last, to defend Tweety, include rules of evidence, all about hearsay.
There are a number of silly defenses offered by Tweety Trump defenders. The hearsay evidence defense is just STUPID!
These words relate to our Government today: hearsay, circumstantial, evidence, testimony, court, impeachment, process, legalistic, Judge, Jury, Constitutional Duty, Congress, Executive, Government Branches, co-equals, Balance of Powers, Checks and Balances, Judiciary, conservative, liberal, gaslighting, gaslight, deceit, treacherous, divided, tribal, idiotic, conscious betrayal.
I could add many more, but this is the point: OUR DEMOCRACY IS DYSFUNCTIONAL!
What GOP Tweety Trump defenders surely KNOW about evidence, not that it applies to an impeachment, rather it applies to a court proceedings. This note is offered merely to show intentional ignorance and intentional deception by the GOP defending Tweety.
The Tweety Trump defenders are also trying to make the American public think the Dems and the impeachment proceedings should be handled like a court case, which it is NOT! IMPEACHMENT IS NOT A COURT CASE, AND THE RULES ARE NOT THE SAME.
The impeachment proceedings is a Constitutional process NOT a court proceeding.
WHAT TWEETY DEFENDERS DEFINITELY KNOW ABOUT EVIDENCE, BUT ARE WILLING TO LIE ABOUT TO WIN AT ANY COST, INCLUDING DOING HARM TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES, THUS BREACHING THEIR OATH OF OFFICE BY ENDAGERING AMERICANS, IS THE FACT HEARSYA EVIDENCE, LIKE CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IS ADMISSIBLE IN IMPEACHMENTS AND A COURT OF LAW.
Read this material, or any other bona fide lawyers statement on the evidence obtained by hearsay and the evidence revealed by circumstances.
"Legal Myths Debunked: Circumstantial Evidence & Hearsay"
Brian Mathias Law October 23, 2017
http://brianmathiaslaw.com/legal-resources/2017/10/23/legal-myths-debunked-circumstantial-evidence-hearsay
"1. Circumstantial Evidence Can Be Just As Powerful As Direct Evidence
If you regularly watch legal television shows or movies, you are probably familiar with the phrase “circumstantial evidence”. The phrase is almost invariably used in legal dramas to imply that evidence is weak, or even to imply that circumstantial evidence is not true evidence at all. For example, in a criminal courtroom drama you may hear something along the lines of, “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you must find my client not guilty because the prosecution has only offered circumstantial evidence that he committed murder.”
The legal reality is totally different; circumstantial evidence or “indirect evidence” is extremely common and it can be just as powerful as direct evidence when proving a case. In fact, one of the first things you will be instructed as a juror is, “As far as the law is concerned it makes no difference whether evidence is direct or indirect…” (California Civil Jury Instruction 202 “Direct and Indirect Evidence”)."
And hearsay . .
"2. Hearsay Is Often Times Admissible Evidence
Most non-lawyers understand that there is a legal concept called “hearsay” and understand there is an evidentiary prohibition against admitting hearsay into evidence. While it is true that there is a general prohibition against hearsay, there are dozens of exceptions to the general rule which allows hearsay as evidence. In fact, the exceptions are so numerous and so common that the exceptions to hearsay nearly swallow up the rule against it.
The topic of hearsay evidence is a complicated one, however, the legal definition is simple “Evidence of a statement that was made other than by a witness while testifying at the hearing and that is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted”. In other words, 1) the statement being offered as evidence was said out of court, and 2) the statement is now being offered in court as factually true."
So, Americans, do not be distracted by BS. Americans, strive to understand the facts, and seek the truth, for the sake of your Republic.
"A Quick and Easy Debunking of Republicans’ Impeachment Hearing Talking Points"
Breaking down the critiques, from “it’s hearsay” to “that guy drank water…”
By Ryan Bort 14 Nov 2019
"5 Ways to Debunk the GOP’s Defense of Donald Trump"
The Republican anti-impeachment arguments are weak but pernicious. Here’s how to counter them.
By Elie Mystal November 15, 2019
https://www.thenation.com/article/gop-impeachment-debunk/
"S. Dakota's 'Meth. We're on it.' campaign confuses but draws attention to growing crisis"
by Leandra Bernstein Tuesday, November 19th 2019
"'Meth. We're on it': South Dakota officials slammed for campaign to tackle state's drug epidemic with 'poorly thought out' motto and ads featuring old people and children"
- South Dakota’s new anti-meth campaign featuring people of different ages and races saying 'I’m on meth' has sparked confusion and ridicule online
- The state's Governor, Kristi Noem, on Monday launched the nearly half-million-dollar campaign to increase awareness of the state's meth epidemic
- The campaign includes a new TV ad, billboards, posters and a website
- But it has generated criticism on social media for its 'mixed messages'
By Leah Mcdonald For Dailymail.com
Published: 20:12 EST, 18 November 2019 | Updated: 20:40 EST, 18 November 2019
