All he knows is hearsay, why would the whistleblower...

[Jarod]

All he knows is hearsay, why would the whistleblower testify?


What would he have that would be admissible?

Those with the direct testimony are better, right?

[Jack]

Repubs want to expose him ... for retaliation. Pure and Simple.

[ThatOwlWoman]

Repubs want to expose him ... for retaliation. Pure and Simple.

Exactly. Plus they want to send a message to any future whistleblowers that Cheeto is sacrosanct so don't even *think* about playing patriot and letting one's superiors know about wrongdoing.

[Jarod]

Someone explain to me how the whistle blower's testimony would be important since its clearly all hearsay.

[Celticguy]

All he knows is hearsay, why would the whistleblower testify?


What would he have that would be admissible?

Those with the direct testimony are better, right?

None of the rest thought whistles need be blown

[Cypress]

All he knows is hearsay, why would the whistleblower testify?


What would he have that would be admissible?

Those with the direct testimony are better, right?

This question should be directed specifically to rightwing posters, because in my experience they put a lot of weight on hearsay, unsubstantiated innuendo, third-person gossip, misrepresentation, extrapolation, and guesswork.

[Getin the ring]

it's like if you're ratt is mad because because your target boinked his Mom.

give you some reference?

[Getin the ring]

the whistleblower is going to have to publically testify sooner or later, you do know that right?

kicking and screaming or otherwise, schifty is on record saying he doesn't know who he is... that's going to hurt when we find out that's a lie huh?

[Jarod]

None of the rest thought whistles need be blown

Untrue, there is a second whistle blower and others who took different routs to expose the crimes.

But can you answer the original question?

[Jarod]

the whistleblower is going to have to publically testify sooner or later, you do know that right?

kicking and screaming or otherwise, schifty is on record saying he doesn't know who he is... that's going to hurt when we find out that's a lie huh?

Why would he have to testify? What he said is already confirmed by today's testimony and the transcript.

What makes you say we will find out its a lie, we already found out it was true.

[Getin the ring]

its a really stupid question, you're actually asking why should we hear from the person who started all of this.. do you ever give thought to your babble?

in any court the reputation, motive and coaching of a witness is paramount to your case... you cant be this stupid

[canceled.2021.2]

All he knows is hearsay, why would the whistleblower testify?


What would he have that would be admissible?

Those with the direct testimony are better, right?

So his hearsay is enough to get impeachment started?

[Jarod]

So his hearsay is enough to get impeachment started?

Sure, much like a person who calls the police and says.... "I head my roommate talking about killing her boyfriend."

The statement is hearsay, and is not admissible in court, but it would certainly to start an investigation.
You don't think police investigate on hearsay all the time?

Are you stupid?

[Getin the ring]

Why would he have to testify? What he said is already confirmed by today's testimony and the transcript.

What makes you say we will find out its a lie, we already found out it was true.

do you have the quote where I think what the whistleblower said was a lie?

it's his credibility, his motive, and his possible coaching of testimony..

this is all too complicated for your tiny little mind isn't it

Sure, much like a person who calls the police and says.... I head my roommate talking about killing her boyfriend.

The statement is hearsay, and is not admissible in court, but it would certainly enough to start an investigation.

and end the investigation if that's all there was, the heresay

why aren't you even trying?

[Southern Chicken]

All he knows is hearsay, why would the whistleblower testify?


What would he have that would be admissible?

Those with the direct testimony are better, right?

1)Congressional hearings are conducted far differently than court trials.
2)In court, hearsay is generally forbidden while a hearing adds the right to confront witnesses.