Democrats need to understand what evidence means

[Couchpotato]

The phone call with Zelensky and participation in this supposed sham investigation by his campaign staff

The fact that he called his supporters to Washington DC that morning and instructed them to march to the Capitol.

He never said anything about going inside did he? Just like Ole Joe never "talked business"

Testimony from the person who he raped.

You mean like the testimony of the woman who accused Joe of sexual assault? Or the 3-4 women who accused Clinton of rape/sexual assault? That kind of testimony?

The recorded phone call with Raffensperger where he was trying to coerce him into throwing away Biden votes.

That entire case is weak. Not as weak as the NY DA's case but really weak. It's an odd case to bring because he's likely actually guilty of the classified document charges. Bringing these weak cases (which are 100% politically motivated) makes them all look that way.

The FBI raid which found classified documents scattered around his compound.

 

[Marener]

Yep. He's such a brilliant "consultant", huh.

How am I supposed to know? How are you supposed to know?

 

[Marener]

He never said anything about going inside did he? Just like Ole Joe never "talked business"

He sure wasn’t all that worried when they did break in, was he. His phone calls to besieged congress members and lack of action on that day speak volumes.

You mean like the testimony of the woman who accused Joe of sexual assault? Or the 3-4 women who accused Clinton of rape/sexual assault? That kind of testimony?

You’d have to ask the jury.

That entire case is weak. Not as weak as the NY DA's case but really weak. It's an odd case to bring because he's likely actually guilty of the classified document charges. Bringing these weak cases (which are 100% politically motivated) makes them all look that way.

How weak is it when he’s recorded asking Raffensperger to find him the votes? It’s appalling.

 

[Smokin' OP]

Your denial of the mountain of evidence isnt going to help Joe. It just makes you look dishonest and stupid. Find a better debate angle for Christ sake. Your laziness and lack of imagination offends me.

WHEN is the mountain going to testify...............under oath?

 

[BS Filter]

What do you have on Joe, Dumb dumb? You have evidence on Hunter. For tax evasion. Sitting on the board of foreign companies and collecting millions of dollars because your Daddy is somebody isn't illegal.

Daddy getting his cut is illegal.

 

[BS Filter]

How am I supposed to know? How are you supposed to know?

Do you look into the toilet when you get up to try to figure out what just happened?

 

[Zincwarrior]

Congress can impeach based on circumstantial evidence, especially when there is tons of it.

Please..do! The republicans will lose the House for a generation if they do that.

 

[Curried Goats]

Daddy getting his cut is illegal.

Did Daddy get a cut? Where is that evidence?

 

[bripat9643]

A big part of the dispute is that Democrats, in their effort to defend what increasingly looks like a highly corrupt and compromised Biden, scream “there’s no evidence!!!” The problem is that Democrats don’t understand what evidence is.

They think it means absolute proof. It does not. It means facts that make a claim likely, and to that we have whistleblower testimony, Archer’s testimony, 30+ visits from Hunter’s Burisma partner to the WH, bank records and SARs, the creation of 20 shell companies, the payoffs of $20 million coming from foreign countries and distributed to nine Biden family members, and so forth.

PLENTY of evidence.

relevant

www.law.cornell.edu

Yep, progs believe none of that is evidence. They would have you believe that thousands of people are imprisoned every year with no evidence.

 

[Zincwarrior]

We have listed the evidence over and over.

Thats not evidence. Thats shit pouring out your mouth you fucking moron.

 

[bripat9643]

Did Daddy get a cut? Where is that evidence?

That's why they want his bank records, fool.

 

[bripat9643]

Thats not evidence. Thats shit pouring out your mouth you fucking moron.

Thanks for proving that you don't know what evidence is.

 

[bripat9643]

Unfortunately you don't meet the definition of relevant evidence. You have put the cart, before the horse.

You have to have factual, provable evidence FIRST, then you can have relevant evidence to support the factually and provable evidence.

Which Republicans do not have, and are in a partisan witch hunt, on Hunter, to find.


Your link says

Cornell Law SchoolSearch Cornell
Toggle navigation

1. LII
2. Wex
3. relevant

relevant​

Primary tabs​

Relevant means, with regards to evidence, having some value or tendency to prove a matter of fact significant to the case. Federal Rule of Evidence 401 states that “evidence is relevant if: (a) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and (b) the fact is of consequence in determining the action.” Generally, relevant evidence is admissible, and a common objection to the admission of evidence is that it is irrelevant.

An example of relevant evidence in a murder trial could be the DNA evidence that defendant possessed the murder weapon and testimony from a witness who saw him at the scene around the time of the murder.


The Committee Notes on Rule 401 clarify that “[r]elevancy is not an inherent characteristic of any item of evidence but exists only as a relation between an item of evidence and a matter properly provable in a case.” That is, it is only an item’s relationship to what a party seeks to prove in trial that makes it relevant.

You're a special kind of dumbass.

 

[Marener]

Do you look into the toilet when you get up to try to figure out what just happened?

Go on an detail your personal experience working in legal and business consulting with Hunter Biden.

 

[Zincwarrior]

You can buy access anyone in government. We all know that.

Just pretend to be their best friend and fly them out to vacation on your private yacht.

$2mm is the going rate for a conservative SCOTUS justice now.

 

[bripat9643]

"Looks like" you have nothing.

It looks like you're another moron who doesn't know what evidence is.

 

[Smokin' OP]

Yep, progs believe none of that is evidence.

No, a person SAYING they have evidence is NOT the same as HAVING evidence.

They would have you believe that thousands of people are imprisoned every year with no evidence.

That's what teabaggers claim............with their dear leader.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Please show us these invoices.

Show us the laptop with a legal chain of custody. Oh yea, you can't even do that. At least you have some dick pics to jerk off to.

 

[Curried Goats]

That's why they want his bank records, fool.

Well you don't just get access to people's bank records just because you want them. That's not how the criminal justice system works, Bozo.

 

[BS Filter]

Did Daddy get a cut? Where is that evidence?

The IRS has the evidence. You didn't watch the hearing, did you.