Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
The Sandbox - PittsburghThe Sandbox is a collection of off-topic discussions. Humorous threads, Sports talk, and a wide variety of other topics can be found here. If it's NOT an adult-themed topic, then it belongs here
would you feel better about it if i called her a milf cunt?
was it toxic rancor the press declared her secondhand testimony "BOMBSHELL" evidence?
I'd refer you to legal terminology where you have direct witnesses and corroborating witnesses. There are those who were there and saw with their own eyes, and then they tell someone who recalls the story and corroborates that story. The timing becomes critical in this but, often times testimony that fluctuates for reasons like - money, influence, threats or other, can be held to be more believable when it's corroborated by other direct or indirect supporting person's.
Nobody saw the immaculate reception but it was Franco with the ball after the cameras stopped rolling and the rest of the audience corroborated the event.
I'd refer you to legal terminology where you have direct witnesses and corroborating witnesses. There are those who were there and saw with their own eyes, and then they tell someone who recalls the story and corroborates that story. The timing becomes critical in this but, often times testimony that fluctuates for reasons like - money, influence, threats or other, can be held to be more believable when it's corroborated by other direct or indirect supporting person's.
Nobody saw the immaculate reception but it was Franco with the ball after the cameras stopped rolling and the rest of the audience corroborated the event.
I'd refer you to legal terminology called hearsay
The general rule is that hearsay evidence is not admissible at trial. The rule against using hearsay evidence is to prevent out-of-court, second hand statements from being used as evidence at trial given their potential unreliability.
This is because the usual level of scrutiny is lost with hearsay evidence as the maker of the statement is not at Court to be cross-examined and assessed by the jury.
The general rule is that hearsay evidence is not admissible at trial. The rule against using hearsay evidence is to prevent out-of-court, second hand statements from being used as evidence at trial given their potential unreliability.
This is because the usual level of scrutiny is lost with hearsay evidence as the maker of the statement is not at Court to be cross-examined and assessed by the jury.
Oh I agree that it's not the same as direct eyewitness testimony but to say it isn't effective or influential is just wrong. It is normally used to validate or provide context etc. when needed.
The general rule is that hearsay evidence is not admissible at trial. The rule against using hearsay evidence is to prevent out-of-court, second hand statements from being used as evidence at trial given their potential unreliability.
This is because the usual level of scrutiny is lost with hearsay evidence as the maker of the statement is not at Court to be cross-examined and assessed by the jury.
True that part of the testimony given could be classified as hearsay, but this is not a trial. I'm not seeing anything yet in the released report that she or anyone said that hasn't been corroborated. If there is, just provide the foot note# and I'll search.
True that part of the testimony given could be classified as hearsay, but this is not a trial. I'm not seeing anything yet in the released report that she or anyone said that hasn't been corroborated. If there is, just provide the foot note# and I'll search.
Hutchinson’s account Tuesday about a dramatic physical altercation between Trump and his top security official on Jan. 6 has come under intense scrutiny after sources told NBC News that two witnesses were prepared to testify under oath that it never happened.
AND
“The handwritten note that Cassidy Hutchinson testified was written by her was in fact written by Eric Herschmann on January 6, 2021,” a Herschmann spokesperson said. “All sources with direct knowledge and law enforcement have and will confirm that it was written by Mr. Herschmann.”
The pair of discrepancies have destroyed Hutchinson’s credibility
Hutchinson’s account Tuesday about a dramatic physical altercation between Trump and his top security official on Jan. 6 has come under intense scrutiny after sources told NBC News that two witnesses were prepared to testify under oath that it never happened.
AND
“The handwritten note that Cassidy Hutchinson testified was written by her was in fact written by Eric Herschmann on January 6, 2021,” a Herschmann spokesperson said. “All sources with direct knowledge and law enforcement have and will confirm that it was written by Mr. Herschmann.”
The pair of discrepancies have destroyed Hutchinson’s credibility
They have a copy. Where is CSI when you need them?
do you really think the committee wants a hand writing analysis? of course not. but that's the problem with the whole thing isn't it? it was a manufactured spectacle designed to present a preformed narrative and had nothing to do with actual "fact finding".
otherwise the secret service who stated the "narrative", second hand at that, didn't happen and who said the agents who were there said they would testify. can't have that, can we?
even the FBI has said there was no planned insurrection.
The two sources cited in the post above, are from 2021. The resulting inquiries from the January 6th committee would show that there are indeed a lot more facts, that implicate coordination. I'm not sure those dotted lines connect directly to trump, but it does show coordination and it has been since those reports that these folks like The oath keepers have gone to jail. When you state that there is no insurrection, that is not what that first link even shows. It says it does not show it's tied to Trump. More appropriatly it mean at the time of that article they had the ability to connect all the different communications.
Down playing what happened in January is the dumbest thing conservatives should do. They should just say those were bad actors and bad people. Making excuses for storming the capital is foolish.
The two sources cited in the post above, are from 2021. The resulting inquiries from the January 6th committee would show that there are indeed a lot more facts, that implicate coordination. I'm not sure those dotted lines connect directly to trump, but it does show coordination and it has been since those reports that these folks like The oath keepers have gone to jail. When you state that there is no insurrection, that is not what that first link even shows. It says it does not show it's tied to Trump. More appropriatly it mean at the time of that article they had the ability to connect all the different communications.
Down playing what happened in January is the dumbest thing conservatives should do. They should just say those were bad actors and bad people. Making excuses for storming the capital is foolish.
name one. the Oath Keepers? they had no impact at all. Ray Epps? tweets and posts on twitter and facebook? BLM and Antifa do the same.
who say's i'm downplaying it? it was stupid. it was not an insurrection. it was a riot. and in some cases it wasn't even that.
i'm sure you know that there are many documented examples of the capitol police allowing these "insurrectionists" into the Capitol building? so .. they were in on it? they coordinated it??
I'm not sure how or why the question of coordination has come up. I'm looking again at the Jan 6th executive report. I don't see where they are trying to prove coronation or the need to. I don't know of any testimony in this area at all.
I'll assume that you're saying that the lack of any proof is a get out of jail free card, but it's not.
As far as the real purpose, I believe this is the answer.
