Trump

As usual, people get very confused about legal terms.

Hearsay is when one person tells another person what happened. Example: You had a phone call with someone. You tell me what was said in the phone call. For you who participated in the phone call "it" is not "hearsay"... it is the facts of the phone call (assuming you are telling me the truth). For me, since I didn't participate in the phone call, the information is hearsay.

Now if the various officials who are testifying about Trump's phone call were actually listening in on the phone conversation, their testimony is NOT hearsay. It is the facts of the phone conversation that they actually heard. assuming they are not lying.

So, if "X" number of people listened in on a phone conversation (again NOT hearsay) and all say ABC was said by the President, that is pretty compelling evidence that the president said ABC.

A transcription would not necessarily mean anything, unless: The transcript was a verbatim transcript taken by a professional at the time of the phone call, or a verbatim transcript taken by a profession from a recording of the phone call. A redacted summary transcript would ultimately be meaningless.




I've said this many times and maintain that position: The Senate won't remove Trump.

Side note: There is also a difference between "hearsay" and "opinion".

Many people have the "opinion" that Trump did something wrong in the phone call, others have the "opinion" that nothing was wrong with the phone call.

By way of the impeachment hearing we are learning what was said in the phone call from people who (apparently) listened to it, so we are learning facts not "hearsay".

Of course some will have the "opinion" that any and all corroborating testimony by Trump Administration officials is all really lies by the deep state.

I had read that a transcript is produced by a Voice Recognition system, and then edited by those on the call for clarity and accuracy where the VR got it wrong.

Then I ran across this:

But former White House staffers said that the Trump administration, in a departure from prior presidencies, has been more willing to edit the telephone conversation memos to remove errors or insensitive remarks Trump has made, apparently in an effort to avoid political heat or embarrassment.

“Don’t rely on whatever transcript is released,” said a former staffer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to comment candidly. “Even if it’s unredacted; those transcripts are heavily edited by political leadership at NSC. I’ve seen substance deleted from these call ‘transcripts’ to delete either superfluous details or more substance.”
Fake News


... It's not like we have to worry about any missing 18 minutes, or so.


So you're right - A transcript no longer means anything.

Yes. That would be the correct procedure.



...and maybe in an effort to avoid showing the quid pro quo.

And that would NOT be the correct procedure.

"My hands are tied!"

Pussy POTUS picks GOPers to stand up to Erdogan ....



echos of...

I had Bone Spurs
I wasn't allowed to go to war. I would have loved too. It was a great war, but I had Bone Spurs

That should have read: By way of the impeachment hearing hopefully we going to learn what was actually said in the phone call from people who (apparently) listened to it, so we will learn the facts not "hearsay".

My bad...

We are only one full day into the impeachment proceedings, so the only way to know for certain is to wait until all of the witnesses are heard from.

also there is no way a trial is going to go 24/7 for a long period of time. they can campaign in the evenings and weekends. Technology has advanced enough that they could talk to voters without actually touring the country. So since i know, AOC is supporitng Bernie, she (and others) could be live in the arena, and bernie either appear from a DC studio in the evening or a recorded speech. Not ideal and some people wont like it, because they think technology sucks. But everyone in the senate and running are all pretty tech savy and aleadry suing social media and outher methods to "get out the vote" so i really don't see it as that big of an issue to overcome.I don't think being sitting on the trial is as much of a detriment that some Republicans are making it out to be.


Frankly a lot of the senate are pretty lazy about showing up to work in DC all day every day, and senators are not sequestered during the process. If they cant time manage campaigning and serving on the senate, they maybe they cant time manage being president---Though apparently "executive time" is a thing now, so there's that.

aka: On the s***ter, watching Fox News and tweeting reactions

And, the longer it goes on the worse it is for Trump.

If the Senate shuts it down quickly everyone has time to put it all behind...

So, let's say (hypothetically of course) the HR gets there part done by Mid January (I think they might want to get it done sooner...) Then let's say the Senate gets their part done by March 1st... that leave something like 8 months for "impeachment' to no longer be an issue. Those against Trump will still be against him. Those for him will still be for him. So the trick is to get the people in the middle to pick a side.... and 8 months give Trump a lot to time to point to the economy (assuming it holds steady or grows), point to unemployment (assuming it holds steady or drops)... abandoning the Kurds will be old news... the Russia investigation will be ancient history... the whole impeachment thing will be out of the news cycle... really a quick end by the Senate helps Trump more than a slow end hurts the Democratic Senators running for office....

The big thing would be: Once the Senate (right or wrong) gives Trump a pass... can he not get into another scandal before Nov 2020?

My best friend is not a supporter of Trump. He calls him a compulsive liar and rude. I concur with that assessment and I would like to add my own. Trump represents the opportunists, the people who look for what can benefit them and those like them the best without paying heed to how they do it.

Trump's lineage is deeply rooted in this. His grandmother seized the opportunity of getting involved with someone who could offer her more and then the ball started rolling....

His taxes.

Two lawsuits to gain access to them have finally made their way past all the appeals bulls*** and are now headed to the Supreme Court. The only question is whether or not the Supreme Court will take them, this term.

A real miracle would be if access is granted before impeachment, adding to the case. But that does not appear likely.

39% popularity. Ouch, that must hurt. Well, the peach must be working.

I'm guessing that you are trying to be funny, but....

Trump has been holding relatively steady in the low to mid 40's. Today his average is no 39%, it is (averaged) 44%... of course Rasmussen has him up at 48% but they can't really be taken seriously. His low is with Reuters/Ipsos which has him at 40%.

I'm sure you got your information from somewhere... but there are a number of legitimate polling sights out there.

Again.... with Trump: Think mid-to low 40's and you are pretty much right.

Anything higher or lower is (mostly) questionable.

Trump is demanding that South Korea pay roughly 500% more in 2020 to cover the cost of keeping US troops on the peninsula, a congressional aide and an administration official confirmed to CNN.

Lil'Kim must be happy.

Hmmm... I wonder how much a wall would cost?