To sum up Marie Yovanovitch’s testimony so far: she’s mad because she got caught.— Dan Bongino (@dbongino) November 15, 2019
That’s all. Have a great day.
Respectfully, this is all you need to know about Ambassador Yovanovitch's testimony. She admits she can't bring any firsthand knowledge to:— Mark Meadows (@RepMarkMeadows) November 15, 2019
- The 7/25 phone call
- Discussions surrounding phone call
- Discussions surrounding delay of aid
And this is the Democrats second witness pic.twitter.com/jVH2H0zcZs
33 comments:
Slurping the President's dick
It's past time that steaming pile of excrement, Brennan was held accountable
Contrary to a general impression that the FBI launched the Trump-Russia conspiracy probe,
Brennan pushed it to the bureau – breaking with CIA tradition by intruding into domestic politics: the 2016 presidential election. He also supplied suggestive but ultimately false information to counterintelligence investigators and other U.S. officials.
Leveraging his close proximity to President Obama, Brennan sounded the alarm about alleged Russian interference to the White House, and was tasked with managing the U.S. intelligence community's response.
While some FBI officials expressed skepticism about the Trump/Russia narrative as they hunted down investigative leads, Brennan stood out for insisting on its veracity.
To substantiate his claims, Brennan relied on a Kremlin informant who was later found to be a mid-level official with limited access to Putin’s inner circle.
Circumventing normal protocol for congressional briefings, Brennan supplied then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid with incendiary Trump-Russia innuendo that Reid amplified in a pair of public letters late in the election campaign.
After Trump's unexpected victory, Brennan oversaw the hasty production of the tenuous Intelligence Community Assessment.
Departing from his predecessors’ usual practice of staying above the political fray after leaving office, Brennan has worked as a prominent analyst for MSNBC, where he has used his authority as a former guardian of the nation’s top secrets to launch vitriolic attacks on a sitting president, accusing Trump of "treasonous" conduct.
MynameisRogernotAlky, tell us what hard first hand evidence of the Phone Call did she provide?
hang brennan from the neck until dead...
...on the national mall...
...on January 20, 2021...
...with President trump pulling the lever on the gallows trap door right after his SECOND inauguration.
Trump ally Roger Stone found guilty of lying to Congress, witness tampering
PUBLISHED FRI, NOV 15 201911:47 AM ESTUPDATED MOMENTS AGO
Kevin Breuninger
@KEVINWILLIAMB
Dan Mangan
@_DANMANGAN
KEY POINTS
Roger Stone, a longtime friend and confidant of President Donald Trump, was found guilty of lying to Congress and witness tampering by a jury in federal court in Washington, D.C.
Stone, 67, a self-described political trickster, was convicted of all seven criminal counts that he faced: obstruction of proceedings, five founds of false statements, and one count of witness tampering.
The charges related to allegations that Stone had lied to Congress about his contacts with WikiLeaks during the 2016 election, and to his alleged efforts to get his associate Randy Credico to back up his lies.
Rule 803 – Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay
The following are not excluded by the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness:
(1) Present Sense Impression. A statement describing or explaining an event or condition, made while or immediately after the declarant perceived it.
(2) Excited Utterance. A statement relating to a startling event or condition, made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement that it caused.
(3) Then-Existing Mental, Emotional, or Physical Condition. A statement of the declarant’s then-existing state of mind (such as motive, intent, or plan) or emotional, sensory, or physical condition (such as mental feeling, pain, or bodily health), but not including a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed unless it relates to the validity or terms of the declarant’s will.
(4) Statement Made for Medical Diagnosis or Treatment. A statement that:
(A) is made for — and is reasonably pertinent to — medical diagnosis or treatment; and
(B) describes medical history; past or present symptoms or sensations; their inception; or their general cause.
(5) Recorded Recollection. A record that:
(A) is on a matter the witness once knew about but now cannot recall well enough to testify fully and accurately;
(B) was made or adopted by the witness when the matter was fresh in the witness’s memory; and
(C) accurately reflects the witness’s knowledge.
If admitted, the record may be read into evidence but may be received as an exhibit only if offered by an adverse party.
(6) Records of a Regularly Conducted Activity. A record of an act, event, condition, opinion, or diagnosis if:
(A) the record was made at or near the time by — or from information transmitted by — someone with knowledge;
(B) the record was kept in the course of a regularly conducted activity of a business, organization, occupation, or calling, whether or not for profit;
(C) making the record was a regular practice of that activity;
(D) all these conditions are shown by the testimony of the custodian or another qualified witness, or by a certification that complies with Rule 902(11) or (12) or with a statute permitting certification; and
(E) the opponent does not show that the source of information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate a lack of trustworthiness.
(7) Absence of a Record of a Regularly Conducted Activity. Evidence that a matter is not included in a record described in paragraph (6) if:
(A) the evidence is admitted to prove that the matter did not occur or exist;
(B) a record was regularly kept for a matter of that kind; and
(C) the opponent does not show that the possible source of the information or other circumstances indicate a lack of trustworthiness.
(8) Public Records. A record or statement of a public office if:
(A) it sets out:
(i) the office’s activities;
(ii) a matter observed while under a legal duty to report, but not including, in a criminal case, a matter observed by law-enforcement personnel; or
(iii) in a civil case or against the government in a criminal case, factual findings from a legally authorized investigation; and
(B) the opponent does not show that the source of information or other circumstances indicate a lack of trustworthiness.
(9) Public Records of Vital Statistics. A record of a birth, death, or marriage, if reported to a public office in accordance with a legal duty.
get a load of THIS shit -
Bloomberg
Verified account
@business
Follow Follow @business
More
The first public impeachment hearing against Donald Trump laid out how a handful of loyalists led by Rudy Giuliani wrested control of U.S. policy from seasoned diplomats
2:58 AM - 14 Nov 2019
https://twitter.com/business/status/1194932669685096448?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1194932669685096448&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Face.mu.nu%2F
huh.
all this time i was under the impression, informed by our constitution, that our president was in charge of US foreign policy.
now i'm finding out that it's seasoned diplomats who are completely in charge of US foreign policy.
how did this significant departure from our constitution go undetected for so long???
Are you allowed to watch it, do you have TV rights?
MynameisRogernotAlky, tell us what hard first hand evidence of the Phone Call did she provide?
(11) Records of Religious Organizations Concerning Personal or Family History. A statement of birth, legitimacy, ancestry, marriage, divorce, death, relationship by blood or marriage, or similar facts of personal or family history, contained in a regularly kept record of a religious organization.
(12) Certificates of Marriage, Baptism, and Similar Ceremonies. A statement of fact contained in a certificate:
(A) made by a person who is authorized by a religious organization or by law to perform the act certified;
(B) attesting that the person performed a marriage or similar ceremony or administered a sacrament; and
(C) purporting to have been issued at the time of the act or within a reasonable time after it.
(13) Family Records. A statement of fact about personal or family history contained in a family record, such as a Bible, genealogy, chart, engraving on a ring, inscription on a portrait, or engraving on an urn or burial marker.
(14) Records of Documents That Affect an Interest in Property. The record of a document that purports to establish or affect an interest in property if:
(A) the record is admitted to prove the content of the original recorded document, along with its signing and its delivery by each person who purports to have signed it;
(B) the record is kept in a public office; and
(C) a statute authorizes recording documents of that kind in that office.
(15) Statements in Documents That Affect an Interest in Property. A statement contained in a document that purports to establish or affect an interest in property if the matter stated was relevant to the document’s purpose — unless later dealings with the property are inconsistent with the truth of the statement or the purport of the document.
(16) Statements in Ancient Documents. A statement in a document that was prepared before January 1, 1998 and whose authenticity is established.
(17) Market Reports and Similar Commercial Publications. Market quotations, lists, directories, or other compilations that are generally relied on by the public or by persons in particular occupations.
(18) Statements in Learned Treatises, Periodicals, or Pamphlets. A statement contained in a treatise, periodical, or pamphlet if:
(A) the statement is called to the attention of an expert witness on cross-examination or relied on by the expert on direct examination; and
(B) the publication is established as a reliable authority by the expert’s admission or testimony, by another expert’s testimony, or by judicial notice.
If admitted, the statement may be read into evidence but not received as an exhibit.
(19) Reputation Concerning Personal or Family History. A reputation among a person’s family by blood, adoption, or marriage — or among a person’s associates or in the community — concerning the person’s birth, adoption, legitimacy, ancestry, marriage, divorce, death, relationship by blood, adoption, or marriage, or similar facts of personal or family history.
(20) Reputation Concerning Boundaries or General History. A reputation in a community — arising before the controversy — concerning boundaries of land in the community or customs that affect the land, or concerning general historical events important to that community, state, or nation.
(21) Reputation Concerning Character. A reputation among a person’s associates or in the community concerning the person’s character.
(22) Judgment of a Previous Conviction. Evidence of a final judgment of conviction if:
(A) the judgment was entered after a trial or guilty plea, but not a nolo contendere plea;
(B) the conviction was for a crime punishable by death or by imprisonment for more than a year;
(C) the evidence is admitted to prove any fact essential to the judgment; and
(D) when offered by the prosecutor in a criminal case for a purpose other than impeachment, the judgment was against the defendant.
The pendency of an appeal may be shown but does not affect admissibility.
(23) Judgments Involving Personal, Family, or General History, or a Boundary. A judgment that is admitted to prove a matter of personal, family, or general history, or boundaries, if the matter:
(A) was essential to the judgment; and
(B) could be proved by evidence of reputation.
https://www.rulesofevidence.org/article-viii/rule-803/
Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay
https://www.rulesofevidence.org/article-viii/rule-803/
The law does not forbid second hand knowledge in a criminal investigation.
h/t: AoS -
"OK, here are some take-aways from the Democrats' impeachment show trial:
"The president needs to prove his innocence.
"Surprisingly, hearsay evidence is actually better than direct, first-hand evidence.
"The purpose of impeaching Trump is to make sure he does not get re-elected. The Democrats are openly admitting this. See also here.
"Also, President Trump is being impeached because he tried to 'wrest control' of U.S. foreign policy from 'seasoned diplomats.' (see the second item under the fold). Which is weird, you know, because diplomats, no matter how 'seasoned', are supposed to follow policy, not set it.
"The breath-taking arrogance of this last one is especially galling. The old common wisdom was that the 'Deep State' was just a kwazy konspiracy theory cooked up by kooky konservatives from their paranoid, delusional fantasies. But, upon further reflection, the Deep State is apparently the fourth branch of government, not mentioned in the US Constitution, but nevertheless real and necessary; a bulwark, if you will, that protects the perks, privileges and prerogatives of an unaccountable, bureaucratic elite against American citizens who have the insolence to believe that they're entitled to participate in constitutionally mandated elections."
my personal fave:
"Surprisingly, hearsay evidence is actually better than direct, first-hand evidence."
so... the willing suspension of disbelief, the collective wisdom of our entire history of jurisprudence AND dismissal of common sense is required to accept this bullshit.
and the asshole who uttered those words?
yup. a lawyer.
The dumb goat fucking asshole who can't find his own in the dark posted
Blogger KansasDemocrat said...
MynameisRogernotAlky, tell us what hard first hand evidence of the Phone Call did she provide?
She's not there as a witness to the call you dumb fuck....don't you pay attention to anything but stupid R talking points?????? BWAAAAAAA!!!!!
She's not there as a witness to the call
true.
she's there because orange man is a big meanie.
or something like that.
i find it hard to believe that no one told this dumb fuck that she serves at the pleasure of the president.
she's there because orange man is a big meanie.
BWAAAAAAA!!!! More like a mafia don who don't give a shit about you or the country!!!!!! Stone will be pardoned....that will be a very interesting event......!!!!!
The big orange man tweeting during BS...during live testimony is what rat hole???? A sign of amity???? A threat to her ????? May be you can explain what he's doing since you have your mouth around his dick!!!!!
Three So called witnesses, none actually to the call.
odd way to run this pile of Schiff.
Actual witness would be good.
So when do they appear?
it's hilarious.
marie fucktardovitch can't explain why she was asked to testify.
did you talk to trump in 2019? nope.
mulvaney? nope.
perhaps you need to peddle your ass ache to HR.
LOL.
"marie fucktardovitch can't explain why she was asked to testify."
Lol.
Obama/Biden Sent Blankets to Ukraine.
Trump/Pence Sent Russian Tank Killing Javalin Missiles .
That is what not a witness , witness marie fucktardovitch☆ said.
☆ RRBism
Clearly The Pile of Schiff is not going well or MynameisRogernotAlky would not have spammed yet another thread.
The cool thing is The Newsman that is acting as the Lawyer for Socialist Democrat Pile of steaming Schiff asked how the butt hurt marie fucktardovitch feels.
Lordie, this has turned into a clown card parade.
One Republican tried to bring up a question about John Kerry in 2004!
And? Schiff ruled with and iron Swastika .
So they now convict Roger Stone of lying and want to jail him for many years to come. Well, what about Crooked Hillary, Comey, Strzok, Page, McCabe, Brennan, Clapper, Shifty Schiff, Ohr & Nellie, Steele & all of the others, including even Mueller himself? Didn’t they lie?....
Attorney Barr
Alky Hold his Beer.
That's it for the Get Trump Mueller hunt.
A bunch of low hanging fruit.
But, feel good about MynameisRogernotAlky
more marie fucktardovich -
did 0linsky send javelin missiles to ukraine? nope, blankets and MRE's.
did trump send javelin missiles to ukraine? yes sir.
LOL.
Devastating
watch trump to pardon stone.
he will, if for no other reason than to own the libs.
LOL.
so far we haven't heard from any "witnesses."
all we've heard from is disgruntled employees.
oh... and the reason 0linsky didn't give the javelin's to ukraine?
he didn't want to upset PUTIN.
all we've heard from is disgruntled employees.
Hey you dumb fuck....why would trump attack Maria as she was testifying?????/ Disgruntled yes.....because of trumps antics which she was hindering!!!!!! God when brains were handed out.....they short changed you......BWAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!
Post a Comment