Democrats need to understand what evidence means

[BS Filter]

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.

The IRS did.

 

[bripat9643]

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

Who said it was, dumbass?

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

Morons like you say none of the stuff presented in court to convict them is evidence.

 

[Zincwarrior]

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

Fuck up retard. You think Hatewaypundit is news you slack h
Jawed cracker basement dweller. You literally have NOTHING admissable in a court of law.

So keep circle jerking. I guess its your hobby.

 

[BS Filter]

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

President Trump screwed you fuckers royally with the Supreme Court. Queer marriage is next on the chopping block.

 

[Foolardi]

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

Much ... mush mush mores danny dat.The Drat left Dimocrats simply
don't give a fig.It's gone far beyond being mere pettifoggery.
It's now legion.The way they { Leftists Democrats in power } view
their role.Nearly identical to how the Old Mafia ran things.
But closer to what Stalinism comprised of.

 

[Curried Goats]

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

Do they? Where is the link to that testimony and have they proof they've presented this evidence to Congress?

 

[bripat9643]

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.

You get bank records when you have a credible case that the target of the investigation was engaged in criminal activity, dumbass. Comer has more than enough.

 

[BS Filter]

Do they? Where is the link to that testimony and have they proof they've presented this evidence to Congress?

Watch it. You shouldn't be here if you're uninformed, doo doo.

 

[Marener]

The IRS has the evidence.

ha! That’s a lie.

 

[bripat9643]

Do they? Where is the link to that testimony and have they proof they've presented this evidence to Congress?

Could you translate that into English?

 

[bripat9643]

Fuck up retard. You think Hatewaypundit is news you slack h
Jawed cracker basement dweller. You literally have NOTHING admissable in a court of law.

So keep circle jerking. I guess its your hobby.

It's al admissible, you fucking moron.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Who said it was, dumbass?

Teabaggers.

Morons like you say none of the stuff presented in court to convict them is evidence.

WTF, WHAT court?
The "Evidence" that the teabaggers congress claim they had..............is on the run, from the law.

 

[BS Filter]

ha! That’s a lie.

Why is that a lie?

 

[Marener]

Why is that a lie?

Because they don’t have evidence of money going to Joe Biden.

 

[Foolardi]

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.

Oh! fir crying out loud.Mincing use of legal words.
Now it's onto a term " relevant evidence ". What the hell is that
supposed to mean.Evidence is Evidence.Why not accuse a Judge or
a Jury as if suitable for a Trial.Like in D.C. where Jury pools are
comprised of on average 95 % jurors who vote Democrat.
There used to be a term for that kinda Law.
Law ... West of the Pecos.Or in Judge Roy Beans widdle
court.Basically a one room shanty with a small bar,poker table
and back room { size of a kitchen storage pantry } where Bean
was accustomed to sleeping off his many and varied hangovers.

 

[Magnus]

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

Do you mean "evidence" like the one the Pillow guy peddles on TV? That kind of "evidence"?

Yeah, you are right. We Dems don't get how you idiots keep falling for that junk. But hey, that's just us.

 

[BS Filter]

Because they don’t have evidence of money going to Joe Biden.

They sure do. Damn, you really shouldn't be here.

 

[Curried Goats]

The IRS did.

I'm reading the Congressional site on the hearings now and it's a whole lotta nothing. Lots of evidence of Hunter Biden committing tax fraud and innuendo about the Biden Family doing this and doing that but nothing really specific on which members of the Biden family did what except for Hunter because that's all they got.

You get bank records when you have a credible case that the target of the investigation was engaged in criminal activity, dumbass. Comer has more than enough.

Comer isn't a criminal investigator, Dumb Dumb. He can run all the political investigations he wants, they don't mean shit. Congress is a political body, not a part of the criminal justice system. With a big enough majority all they can do is kick people out of office. Mostly they just do political theater.

Watch it. You shouldn't be here if you're uninformed, doo doo.

I can read just fine and from what I'm reading you have jack shit on Joe.

 

[BS Filter]

Do you mean "evidence" like the one the Pillow guy peddles on TV? That kind of "evidence"?

Yeah, you are right. We Dems don't get how you idiots keep falling for that junk. But hey, that's just us.

Devon Archer testified that Hunter called his daddy to get the prosecutor fired. We know the prosecutor was fired because Joe bragged about it on video.

 

[Foolardi]

Why is that a lie?

There is really no need to beat around the bush.
This is cut and dry.The Left { Democrats,their adjunct
The Mainstream media } Do Not Value Truth.
That's It /// No further discussion necessary.