re: New sworn depositions in support of Blasey Ford!

So Ford and one of them met at a pizzeria? WTF everything about this woman is weird as frick.

quote:

---

So the relevance is not whether the statement was true, just that the statement was made

---

Did you even read the affidavits, Low-TBoy?

- Koehler states Ford didn’t say it was Kav until AFTER he was nominated

- Mazon had to contact Ford 10 days ago to tell HER what she told him; of note, Ford never mentioned Kav. that’s convenient, don’t you think?

- Finally, White states Ford never mentioned Kav.

So the only person who Ford mentioned Kav’s name to prior to the nomination/allegations going public about 10 days ago was her husband, who is forced to support his lying wife.

This is circumstantial proof to you?

quote:

---

The argument he is making is that the testimony isn't offered for the truth of the matter asserted, a requirement for it to be heresay, but rather offered as a rebuttal that the accusation was only contrived after Kavanaugh was nominated.

---

Finally, someone has a clue what they are talking about.

I'm just pointing out the definition of hearsay. Most are concerned with whether this happened or not and these recorded statements would be considered hearsay if proffered for that reason. Even trying to backdoor them around the hearsay rule, they aren't particularly compelling.

Go ahead and pick which exception to hearsay you’re going to use to get over that hurdle. Then we’ll talk.

Exceptions to hearsay

quote:

---

(c) Hearsay.
“Hearsay” means a statement that: (1) the declarant does not make while testifying at the current trial or hearing; and (2) a party offers in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement.

---

The key to hearsay is what you are doing with the statement. If you are using it to prove that the statement is true, it’s hearsay. For example, “She said he touched her, so that proves he touched her.”

However, if you are using a statement for another purpose, such as to refute a claim that the allegations were recently concocted, it isn’t hearsay. For example, “She didn’t make this up last week, she told me the same thing years ago.”

Where’d you get your law degree?

quote:

---

Where’d you get your law degree?

---

He's right about the heresay rule. Where did you get yours?

quote:

---

the testimony isn't offered for the truth of the matter asserted

---

How much do you want to bet this is exactly what it will be used for? Hell it is already being reported as proof that Kavanaugh is guilty in some articles.

Our society, journalists, politicians, political process, and federal government are completely and totally broken at every level.

We are trying to investigate and corroborate a 30 year old unproveable accusation, in which the accuser refuses to testify or even appear in public, never before reported or uncovered as a basis to ruin a man's life and disqualify him from an office he is by all other accounts more qualified than anyone else to hold.

And further, this investigation is seen as a massive victory and hill to die on for plenty of people in this country who only see politics as a 0 sum good VS evil game where the ends always justify the means and ultimate power is the only worthy goal regardless of how it affects anyone else.

Progressive group think trumping reason and logic and a massive sect of our population refusing to be impartial about situations is leading us on a one way collusion course with armed conflict.

I am not even asking you to say Kavanaugh did not do what he is accused of. Can you admit there is a reasonable doubt at this point that the accusations are untrue?