re: "In what kind of trial..."

quote:

---

In what kind of trial is hearsay your only evidence?

---

A non-judicial, political proceeding in which the evidentiary rules are not applicable.

I posted the following on another thread some time ago, and a few people found it helpful. Maybe the same will be true for you.

quote:

---

you must remember that this is NOT a judicial proceeding and that (while there are some analogies) it is NOT a criminal prosecution.

The arguments we have been hearing for three days and WILL be hearing for another three days are NOT “evidence.”. They are each side’s summaries of the hundreds of hours of testimony and thousands of pages of evidence already “admitted“ in the House.

There is an underlying assumption that each side will highlight that portion of the House record which best serves its own purposes. The Senators are presumed to have access to the entire record. Incidentally, reliance upon the House record is one reason that the unfair Dem practices in the House were so problematic.

The whole “witness” issue in the Senate thus has two branches.

The first ties to the Dems. They had every chance to call witnesses in the House, so it seems reasonable to limit them in the Senate to only witnesses or testimony which (for whatever reason) was not available to them during House proceedings.

The second ties to the GOP. Normally, they should be subject to the same standard, but the Dems basically precluded them from developing evidence in the House, so there is a decent argument that they should have greater leeway in the Senate.

Thus, two questions arise. First, do they even NEED witnesses? Davy addressed that question quite well. The second question is whether the less-zealous-for-Trump Senators are willing to hear from witnesses of questionable direct relevance.

In a real legal proceeding, the single question would be whether Trump had objective evidence of wrongdoing by the Bidens when he requested help from Ukraine, but of course this is not a legal proceeding. Set that aside for a moment.

If we use that standard, I think ALL GOP Senators would vote in favor of testimony from a new witness who had been suppressed by the Dems but who provided Trump a pre-Zelensky-call briefing about Biden wrongdoing. However the Bidens themselves have nothing to add on that point. Thus, there is a dispute among the GOP as whether to allow their testimony

---

.