M
Maximus1
Guest
They all make more than average Americans
- Status
H
Horton
Guest
Yes, there are times when opinions are admissible. It is when a subject matter expert is called as a witness, such as a medical examiner in a murder trial. Sondeland was not called as a SME, he was called as a fact witness and he provided zero FACTS.
Opinion & supposition does not equal circumstantial.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Assuming anyone watches CNN any more.Theo520:
Trump asked for an announcement of an investigation, by Zelensky himself, on CNN. Clearly he was more interested in the publicity boost it would give him and not in any actual corruption.
I suppose your case for Trump seeking publicity would be bolstered if he had asked Zelensky to go on Fox or MSNBC (or Hallmark Channel
.)Loading…
www.forbes.com
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Unlike Hunter, they actually do stuff.
Which, I suppose, is your point: they MAKE MORE than the average American, and the average American actually produces more than Hunter Biden.
Well, except, perhaps, babies – Hunter seems to be quite handy in that respect
.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
If Trump can brag that even the “left-wing CNN” has to admit Trump’s cause is valid, that would go a long way in wining over undecided voters, even if they don’t watch CNN. Trump would make sure everyone knew of the interview. In any case, if Trump truly wanted only to have corruption investigated, he would not blow a trumpet before him to announce said investigation.LeafByNiggle:
Assuming anyone watches CNN any more.Theo520:
Trump asked for an announcement of an investigation, by Zelensky himself, on CNN. Clearly he was more interested in the publicity boost it would give him and not in any actual corruption.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
I thought Schiff and his anonymous whistleBLOWER were the ones BLOWING the trumpets?HarryStotle:
If Trump can brag that even the “left-wing CNN” has to admit Trump’s cause is valid, that would go a long way in wining over undecided voters, even if they don’t watch CNN. Trump would make sure everyone knew of the interview. In any case, if Trump truly wanted only to have corruption investigated, he would not blow a trumpet before him to announce said investigation.LeafByNiggle:
Assuming anyone watches CNN any more.Theo520:
Trump asked for an announcement of an investigation, by Zelensky himself, on CNN. Clearly he was more interested in the publicity boost it would give him and not in any actual corruption.
Last edited:
P
petra22
Guest
Did anyone think it was strange that Trump wanted an announcement from Ukraine to be made to–wait for it–CNN???
P
petra22
Guest
I want to memorize this sentence… since it is a proclamation that doesn’t make sense. Yu are saying that Joe demanded the investigation into Burisma? That is what is sounds like to me…
M
Maximus1
Guest
First of all, in just the last few weeks, documents have been obtained despite Trump’s stonewalling that confirm more and more of what Sondland testified to.
At first, when it became apparent that they could no longer hide the information, they clearly redacted the very incriminating parts as a SEPERATE act of cover up. But now they can show that also, as they have clean copies. There was a Trump ordered freeze, hours after the July 25th call, despite Pentagon warning, it violated Federal statutes to do so. THANK GOD THE ARTICLES HAVE BEEN HELD UP!
There are two seperate Federal Rules of evidence. One for expert opinions. One for lay opinions. While it is likely a US AMBASSADOR might qualify as both, depending on the question, the idea of foundation testimony for Sondland’s " opinions" remains a fact.
A fact being corroborated by newly revealed and former concealed facts, every day. NO WONDER THAT TRUMP HAS NO DEFENSE. ( SAVE FOR YELLING WITCH HUNT WHILE SNARLING AND GNASHING TEETH).
Your post as it pertains to Lay witness/ expert witness " opinion" does not consider the law. Where the STARTING POINT IS FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 701 through 706. ( And all of the hundreds of applicable caselaw opinions.
Your argument and the existence of these rules show precisely why NON LEGAL EXPERTS do not decide matters of evidence and admissibility. Judges do.
At first, when it became apparent that they could no longer hide the information, they clearly redacted the very incriminating parts as a SEPERATE act of cover up. But now they can show that also, as they have clean copies. There was a Trump ordered freeze, hours after the July 25th call, despite Pentagon warning, it violated Federal statutes to do so. THANK GOD THE ARTICLES HAVE BEEN HELD UP!
There are two seperate Federal Rules of evidence. One for expert opinions. One for lay opinions. While it is likely a US AMBASSADOR might qualify as both, depending on the question, the idea of foundation testimony for Sondland’s " opinions" remains a fact.
A fact being corroborated by newly revealed and former concealed facts, every day. NO WONDER THAT TRUMP HAS NO DEFENSE. ( SAVE FOR YELLING WITCH HUNT WHILE SNARLING AND GNASHING TEETH).
Your post as it pertains to Lay witness/ expert witness " opinion" does not consider the law. Where the STARTING POINT IS FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 701 through 706. ( And all of the hundreds of applicable caselaw opinions.
Your argument and the existence of these rules show precisely why NON LEGAL EXPERTS do not decide matters of evidence and admissibility. Judges do.
Last edited:
M
Maximus1
Guest
I am trying to understand why Fox Ratings are posted. Or some reference to Zelinski giving HIS TRUMP REQUIRED SPEECH ABOUT A BIDEN INVESTIGATION on any particular network.
Is the intent to marvel at the effectiveness of sequestering the American people from the truth?
Is the intent to marvel at the effectiveness of sequestering the American people from the truth?
M
Maximus1
Guest
Frankly Hunter Biden is a private citizen. He is a grown man of 50 I believe, and is irrelevant to anything except some ongoing effort to sling mud at his dad.
It is a variation on a theme that began with BILLY BEER. I SEE incompetence via nepotism in the Whitehouse with Trump’s as the real difference. Hunter Biden is not making decisions affecting the American people like the Trump kids. And certainly not, by serving on the board of some foreign obscure company in Ukraine.
It is a variation on a theme that began with BILLY BEER. I SEE incompetence via nepotism in the Whitehouse with Trump’s as the real difference. Hunter Biden is not making decisions affecting the American people like the Trump kids. And certainly not, by serving on the board of some foreign obscure company in Ukraine.
Last edited:
D
dvdjs
Guest
The US, its allies and international agencies wanted to push Ukraine forward to combat corruption.This was not some secret backroom deal with private attorneys. But very public.
Loading…
www.nytimes.com
Part of the corruption was the protection of Zlochevsky. A London investigation had to be dropped because of the lack of cooperation of Shkin et al., in Ukraine.
Loading…
www.kyivpost.com
This is old news, that sadly seems to be so lost on those re-inventing the story now that the actual facts may not make sense to them.
T
Theo520
Guest
Man, if only liberals could charge rent for the free mind space they’ve given trump the past year. That would truly break him
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
P
PaulinVA
Guest
Not everybody was told the truth, apparently. It’s not exculpatory.
T
Theo520
Guest
Sandy seems to not know much on the reasoning but does indicate there was a desire to get other allies to also increase their aid. It is far more exculpatory than indicating corrupt motive.
P
PaulinVA
Guest
I think the “desire to get other allies to also increase their aid” as the reason for withholding aid has been debunked and overcome by the released emails.
The “desire to get other allies to also increase their aid” is a poor attempt at finding a justification for something they were doing for purely political purposes.
T
Theo520
Guest
I’m not deep in this, but your points were not evident in the quoted transcript. There was not smoking gun.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Let me spell it out for those not getting the humour.
@LeafByNiggle claimed “Trump asked for an announcement of an investigation, by Zelensky himself, on CNN. Clearly he was more interested in the publicity boost.”
My response was that if Trump were truly interested in getting a publicity BOOST he wouldn’t have asked Zelensky to go on CNN because their viewership is even below that of the Hallmark Channel.
That serves to disprove Leaf’s point, since a publicity BOOST for Trump would have been more likely had he asked Zelensky to go on FOX which has roughly three times the viewership compared to CNN.
See the humour?
I thought not.
- Status